3744 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE 

Office of the Secretary 

Science and Technology Reinvention 

Laboratory Personnel Management 

Demonstration Project, Department of 

the Army, Army Research, 

Development and Engineering 

Command, Armament Research, 

Development and Engineering Center 

(ARDEC) 

AGENCY: Office of the Deputy Under 

Secretary of Defense (Civilian Personnel 

Policy), DoD. 

ACTION: Notice. 

SUMMARY: Section 342(b) of the National 

Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for 

Fiscal Year (FY) 1995, Public Law 103– 

337 (10 U.S.C. 2358 note), as amended 

by section 1109 of NDAA for FY 2000, 

Public Law 106–65, and section 1114 of 

NDAA for FY 2001, Public Law 106– 

398, authorizes the Secretary of Defense 

to conduct personnel demonstration 

projects at DoD laboratories designated 

as Science and Technology Reinvention 

Laboratories (STRLs) to determine 

whether a specified change in personnel 

management policies or procedures 

would result in improved Federal 

personnel management. Section 1105 of 

the NDAA for FY 2010, Public Law 111– 

84, 123 Stat. 2486, October 28, 2009, 

designates additional DoD laboratories 

as STRLs for the purpose of designing 

and implementing personnel 

management demonstration projects for 

conversion of employees from the 

personnel system which applied on 

October 28, 2009. The ARDEC is listed 

in subsection 1105(a) of NDAA for FY 

2010 as one of the newly designated 

STRLs. 

DATES: Implementation of this 

demonstration project will begin no 

earlier than March 9, 2011. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

ARDEC: Ms. Christina Duncan, U.S. 

Army ARDEC, Human Capital 

Management Office, Building 1, 3rd 

Floor, RDAR–EIH, Picatinny Arsenal NJ 

07806–5000. 

DoD: Ms. Betty Duffield, CPMS–PSSC, 

Suite B–200, 1400 Key Boulevard, 

Arlington, VA 22209–5144. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

1. Background 

Since 1966, many studies of DoD 

laboratories have been conducted on 

laboratory quality and personnel. 

Almost all of these studies have 

recommended improvements in civilian 

personnel policy, organization, and 

management. Pursuant to the authority 

provided in section 342(b) of Public 

Law 103–337, as amended, a number of 

DoD STRL personnel demonstration 

projects were approved. These projects 

are ‘‘generally similar in nature’’ to the 

Department of Navy’s ‘‘China Lake’’ 

Personnel Demonstration Project. The 

terminology, ‘‘generally similar in 

nature,’’ does not imply an emulation of 

various features, but rather implies a 

similar opportunity and authority to 

develop personnel flexibilities that 

significantly increase the decision 

authority of laboratory commanders 

and/or directors. 

This demonstration project involves: 

(1) Two appointment authorities 

(permanent and modified term); 

(2) Modified probationary period for 

newly hired employees; 

(3) Modified supervisory and 

managerial probationary period; 

(4) Pay banding; 

(5) Streamlined delegated examining; 

(6) Modified reduction-in-force (RIF) 

procedures; 

(7) Simplified job classification; 

(8) A contribution-based appraisal 

system; 

(9) Academic degree and certificate 

training; 

(10) Sabbaticals; 

(11) A Volunteer Emeritus Corps; 

(12) Direct hire authority for 

candidates with advanced degrees for 

scientific and engineering positions; and 

(13) Distinguished Scholastic 

Achievement Appointment Authority. 

2. Overview 

The NDAA for FY 2010 not only 

designated new STRLs but also repealed 

the National Security Personnel System 

(NSPS) mandating conversion of NSPS 

covered employees to their former 

personnel system or one that would 

have applied absent the NSPS. A 

number of ARDEC employees are 

covered by the NSPS and must be 

converted to another personnel system. 

Section 1105 of NDAA for FY 2010 

stipulates the STRLs designated in 

subsection (a) of section 1105 may not 

implement any personnel system, other 

than a personnel system under an 

appropriate demonstration project as 

defined in section 342(b) of Public Law 

103–337, as amended, without prior 

congressional authorization. In addition, 

any conversion under the provisions of 

section 1105 shall not adversely affect 

any employee with respect to pay or any 

other term or condition of employment; 

shall be consistent with section 4703(f) 

of title 5 United States Code (U.S.C.), 

and shall be completed within 18 

months after enactment of NDAA for FY 

2010. Therefore, since ARDEC is both 

designated an STRL by section 1105 of 

NDAA for FY 2010 and has NSPS 

covered employees, it must convert, at 

a minimum, its NSPS covered 

employees to a personnel management 

demonstration project (Lab Demo) 

before the end of April 2011. 

The proposed STRL Demonstration 

Project Plan for ARDEC was published 

on September 9, 2010 in 75 Federal 

Register (FR) 55200 that was 

subsequently corrected by 75 FR 60091 

published on September 29, 2010. 

During the public comment period 

ending October 9, 2010, DoD received 

40 comments. All comments were 

carefully considered. Some comments 

addressed topics that were outside the 

project’s scope or the demonstration 

authority of 5 U.S.C. 4703. These 

comments are not included in the 

summary below. 

The following summary addresses the 

pertinent comments received, provides 

responses, and notes resultant changes 

to the original project plan in the first 

Federal Register notice. 

A. General 

Seven general comments were 

received; responses are provided below. 

(1) Comment: Employees should be 

returned to the GS system because it is 

viewed that the NSPS performance 

system lost the classification restrictions 

and allowed for growth in salaries 

beyond the GS classification guides. 

Also, the merit compensation system 

allowed for compensation growth not 

based on merit. It would be most 

beneficial to only have one performance 

system, that being the GS system. 

Response: Public Law 111–84, section 

1105, prevents ARDEC from returning to 

the GS system and requires ARDEC to 

develop a Lab Demo. The ARDEC Lab 

Demo has been designed to capture the 

positive features of various personnel 

management systems/projects in use 

today. Specifically, in reference to this 

comment, the ARDEC Lab Demo design 

is founded on the principle that 

standard classification criteria are the 

basis for both performance assessment 

and pay setting. In reference to the 

comment that it would be beneficial to 

have only one performance system, the 

ARDEC Lab Demo performance 

management system is designed to be 

the performance management system for 

the ARDEC workforce. No change to the 

Lab Demo plan is required. 

(2) Comment: The unions have 

already rejected participation in this Lab 

Demo, as they have rejected 

participation in the previous two 

attempts to revise the General Schedule 

system. All implications that this Lab 

Demo is a full workforce management 

process need to be stricken from the 

descriptions and pay bands. This 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3745 

proposal is only for the management 

officials at ARDEC, and should be 

described as such, particularly when 

addressing the expected benefits on 

page 55202. 

Response: The public law directed 

ARDEC to develop a personnel system 

that could cover the majority of the 

workforce, not just management 

officials. The Lab Demo plan was 

designed to cover both bargaining and 

non-bargaining unit eligible employees. 

The intent is for ARDEC to continue to 

pursue Union acceptance. Upon initial 

conversion, there will be both nonmanagement and management 

employees within the ARDEC in Lab 

Demo positions spanning the full 

spectrum of the pay bands and 

associated occupational families. No 

change to the Lab Demo plan is 

required. 

(3) Comment: Return to the 

Acquisition Demonstration project 

without any modifications. 

Response: Public Law 111–84, section 

1105, prevents ARDEC from returning to 

the Acquisition Demonstration Project 

and requires ARDEC to convert eligible 

employees to a personnel system under 

an appropriate demonstration project as 

referred to in section 342(b) of Public 

Law 103–337, October 5, 1994. No 

change to the Lab Demo plan is 

necessary. 

(4) Comment: If as stated, ‘‘The 

primary benefit expected from this 

demonstration project is greater 

organizational effectiveness through 

increased employee satisfaction.’’ Why 

was employee opinion on this 

modification not considered? 

Response: As an integral part of the 

process used to develop the ARDEC Lab 

Demo Project, a number of employee 

outreach venues were used, including 

Town Halls, ARDEC Web-Site, Focus 

Groups, Union Meetings and ARDEC 

Lab Demo mail box to solicit employee 

ideas and recommendations for 

improvement. As a result of these 

outreach initiatives significant changes 

were incorporated into the Lab Demo 

project plan. No change to the initial 

Lab Demo Federal Register notice is 

needed. 

(5) Comment: The fact that the unions 

non-concur suggests that employees will 

not be satisfied with the proposed 

system. 

Response: The ARDEC Lab Demo 

project has been designed to capture the 

positive features of the personnel 

management systems/projects in use 

today with a key objective being 

employee acceptance and satisfaction. 

By incorporating employee suggestions 

into the design and with continuing 

employee feedback as the design 

matures, the full expectation is that 

employees will be satisfied. No change 

to the initial Federal Register notice is 

required. 

(6) Comment: I believe that this 

system is inherently unfair and not in 

line with standard US Government 

personnel practices. This system 

suggests ‘‘pay for contribution.’’ 

Contribution level is inherently tied to 

job assignment. A supervisor, upper 

management, or fiscal events could 

dictate responsibility reduction, at no 

fault of an employee, which would 

eventually result in a lower contribution 

rating and reduced salary. A salary 

reduction without merit is not fair and 

will definitely not result in ‘‘increased 

employee satisfaction.’’ 

Response: The ARDEC Lab Demo 

project uses a contribution-based 

compensation system in that both 

employees’ contributions assessments 

and subsequent base pay are determined 

by reference to the classification system 

criteria. In as much as the pay setting 

and contribution evaluation are one in 

the same, employees’ pay would be 

comparable to the level of work and 

contribution results. Position 

classification defines job responsibilities 

and, therefore, base pay level. It is 

expected that all employees will 

perform, at a minimum, to their position 

responsibilities. Supervisors assign 

objectives and work assignments 

commensurate with position 

responsibilities. No change to the 

Federal Register notice is required. 

(7) Comment: This system does not 

capture nor reward the experience and 

expertise brought to an organization by 

seasoned professionals. A 5-year 

employee who mentors five 1-year 

employees could be considered to 

contribute more than a 30-year 

employee who mentors three 5-year 

employees. In measuring and rewarding 

current ‘‘contribution’’ it negates and 

fails to reward experience and wisdom. 

Response: The ARDEC Lab Demo 

project uses a contribution-based 

compensation system. In as much as the 

pay setting and contribution evaluation 

are one in the same employees base pay 

would be comparable for the work they 

perform and the value of their 

contributions. The system is not 

designed to reward employees for 

experience and wisdom alone but rather 

how they apply wisdom and experience 

to their job. In addition, as in other 

personnel systems, employee 

compensation is not based on amount of 

workload but rather the level of work 

accomplished successfully. No change 

to the Federal Register notice is 

required. 

B. Participating Employees 

Two similar comments regarding 

participating employees were received 

and the response is provided below. 

(1) Comment (two similar comments 

combined): ARDEC should have the 

right to exclude When Actually 

Employed (WAE), Summer Hires (i.e., 

STEPs) and Co-ops (i.e., SCEPs) from 

Lab Demo coverage at least until the 

bargaining unit employees are included. 

ARDEC needs to be able to use 

discretion on that point. 

Response: Public Law 111–84, section 

1105(b) indicates that the personnel of 

each STRL designated in section 

1105(a), which includes ARDEC, are to 

convert to an appropriate demonstration 

project as referred to in Public Law 103– 

337, section 342(b). These conversions 

must be consistent with title 5 U.S.C. 

4703(f) and be completed before April 

28, 2011. The conversion provisions do 

not apply to prevailing rate employees 

or senior executives. Thus, the 

categories of employees mentioned in 

the comment are covered by the 

conversion requirements of Public Law 

111–84, section 1105(b). 

C. Pay Administration 

Eight comments regarding Pay 

Administration were received and the 

responses are provided below. 

(1) Comment: Reassignments to 

positions of similar responsibility 

should not result in an increase to base 

pay. 

Response: The ARDEC Lab Demo does 

not provide for pay increases for 

reassignments to positions with similar 

responsibilities. However, pay increases 

can be granted when a reassignment 

significantly increases the complexity, 

responsibility, and authority or for other 

compelling reasons. Such an increase is 

subject to the specific guidelines 

established by the PMB. No change to 

the Federal Register notice is required. 

(2) Comment: The Federal Register 

does not state anything about overtime. 

The only good thing about NSPS, you 

actually got time and a half for anything 

over 8 hours. 

Response: The NSPS overtime feature 

had been considered for implementation 

in our initial Federal Register notice but 

was determined to be inconsistent with 

existing public law that established Lab 

Demo projects and therefore not 

included. The ARDEC Lab Demo will be 

using the existing GS rules for overtime. 

No change to the Lab Demo plan is 

needed. 

(3) Comment: It is not clear if the 

contribution bonus is continuous bonus 

or a onetime bonus. 

Response: The Contribution Bonus is 

a onetime payment to be paid out on a 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3746 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

yearly basis corresponding to the annual 

rating cycle. Language has been changed 

in the Lab Demo plan paragraph 

III.C.5.c(2), from ‘‘ * * * is a lump sum 

payment * * * ’’ to ‘‘ * * * is a onetime 

lump sum payment * * *.’’ 

(4) Comment: It is not clear how and 

when the General Pay Increase (GPI) 

will be decreased for employees that fall 

above the Normal Pay Range or above 

the upper rail. 

Response: Employees who fall above 

the Normal Pay Range or above the 

upper rail may have their GPI partially 

reduced or denied. The specific rules 

covering when and how much the GPI 

is reduced is a responsibility of the 

PMB. These rules will define under 

what circumstances the GPI will be 

denied or, if reduced, the amount of 

reduction. To address this concern, the 

Federal Register notice will be changed 

to reflect that the PMB will be 

responsible for establishing the rules for 

instances where implementation and 

operating procedures are required such 

as withholding GPI for employees that 

fall above the Normal Pay Range (NPR). 

The Lab Demo plan paragraph II.G.2 is 

changed from ‘‘At a minimum, duties 

executed by the board will be to:’’ to 

‘‘The PMB is responsible for establishing 

the implementation and operating rules 

as required. At a minimum, duties 

executed by the board will be to:’’. Also, 

a new paragraph II.G.2.s has been added 

stating, ‘‘Establish rules and procedures 

for denying or reducing GPI for 

employees whose contributions are in 

region A (above the NPR).’’ 

(5) Comment: Will employees that fall 

above the rail receive the full locality 

pay increase regardless of GPI 

reduction? 

Response: Yes, employees will receive 

locality pay regardless of a reduction in 

GPI. Locality pay is separate from the 

Contribution-Based Compensation 

System. No change to the Federal 

Register notice is required. 

(6) Comment: Traditionally employee 

recognition is not sufficient compared to 

private industry. Recommend raising 

the invention disclosures and patent 

award amounts to a larger limit more 

comparable to private industry. 

Response: Appreciate your comment, 

however after further review, employee 

recognition for invention disclosures 

and patents is not a Federal Register 

notice issue. These awards are 

controlled at the component level 

(Army) and will be further investigated 

through other channels. No change to 

the Federal Register notice is required. 

(1) Comment: The Federal Register 

does not seem to adequately address pay 

setting for employees on temporary 

assignments at the time of transition. 

Response: It is a requirement for 

conversion from the National Security 

Personnel System and the intent of the 

Lab Demo project to ensure an employee 

does not have any loss in pay on 

conversion to the project regardless if 

the employee is on a permanent or a 

temporary assignment prior to 

conversion. Employees on a temporary 

assignment will convert back to their 

permanent position of record and then 

convert to a new temporary assignment 

within the demonstration project. In 

these cases, section 1113(c)(1) would 

also apply to the temporary position, 

i.e., there will be no loss or decrease in 

pay as a result of the conversion of 

positions and employees from NSPS. 

This is already covered in paragraph 

V.B.2 of the Federal Register notice and 

no change is required. 

(2) Comment: For paragraph III.F.1, 

change ‘‘Employees whose performance 

is acceptable and not on pay retention 

will receive the full annual general pay 

increase and the full locality pay.’’ to, 

‘‘Employees whose performance is 

acceptable and not on pay retention will 

receive the full annual general pay 

increase and the full locality pay, with 

the exception of those employees 

covered under paragraph III.C.5.c.(3).’’ 

Response: Employees whose Assessed 

Overall Contribution Score falls in the 

‘‘above the rail’’ region may not be 

officially identified as ‘‘unacceptable;’’ 

however, their GPI is subject to being 

withheld or reduced. Therefore, for 

clarity and completeness the Federal 

Register paragraph III.F.1 has been 

changed as follows: change ‘‘Employees 

whose performance is acceptable and 

not on pay retention will receive the full 

annual general pay increase and the full 

locality pay’’ to, ‘‘Employees whose 

performance is acceptable and not on 

pay retention will receive the full 

annual general pay increase and the full 

locality pay, with the exception of those 

employees’ whose rating is as described 

in paragraph III.C.5.c.(3).’’ 

D. Base Pay 

One comment regarding base pay was 

received and the response is provided 

below. 

(1) Comment: For persons capped at 

the top rate under current NSPS 

equivalent to GS–15, Step 10, + 5% or 

$165,300: 

Since the executive level cap does not 

rise by the cost of living and the 

Locality Market supplement percentage 

is set, then the base pay does not go up 

as much as it normally would. It seems 

unreasonable and unfair, that the 

distribution of pay between the local 

market supplement and base pay which 

comprises the full salary should be at 

the expense of base pay. While the pay 

is capped, the base pay should rise 

relative to the Local Market 

Supplement. If one were to transfer to 

a lower cost of living area where the 

local market supplement was less, then 

one would end up with reduced pay 

even after they have not received full or 

any pay raises for prior years due to the 

executive level cap. It is unclear if the 

same situation exists under the new 

demo project but this issue should be 

fixed. 

Response: The situation as described 

in the comment above will not occur in 

the ARDEC Lab Demo project. In the Lab 

Demo project an employee’s base pay 

may rise to the annual GS–15, Step 10, 

base pay cap. Locality pay adjustments 

are added to this base pay and are 

subject to the overall total Executive 

Level IV salary cap. The ARDEC Lab 

Demo project uses base pay for 

contribution calculations/payouts 

adjustments. All salary adjustments at 

the end of a rating cycle are applied to 

base pay and limited to the base pay 

salary caps for each of the pay bands. 

Locality pay and other salary 

adjustments are added as appropriate 

and are also subject to overall pay cap 

limitations, more specifically Executive 

Level IV. This comment does not 

require any change to the Federal 

Register notice. 

E. Conversion 

Five comments regarding conversion 

were received and the responses are 

provided below. 

(1) Comment (two similar comments 

combined): Clarify what is the deciding 

factor for putting a YF–2 supervisor in 

Pay Band III or Pay Band IV? Page 55203 

(first Federal Register notice) shows 

that a first-level supervisory position 

would be a pay band IV, however, Table 

1—Equivalent NSPS pay bands shows 

YF–2 (first-level supervisory position) 

in both Pay Band III and Pay Band IV. 

I thought it was equal pay for equal 

work? 

Response: Employees will convert to 

the appropriate band based on position 

classification. Table 1 identifies the 

possible bands to which employees may 

convert. The verbiage on Page 55203 is 

solely intended to provide examples of 

the types of positions that could be in 

each band but they are not absolute. 

Case in point, an employee’s position 

can be a first-line supervisor position in 

pay bands II, III, IV, or V depending on 

the position’s responsibilities and type 

and complexity of work supervised. The 

Federal Register notice has been 

changed to better reflect the potential 

position matching upon conversion. 

Paragraph III.A.1 has been changed by 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3747 

adding the following at the end of the 

paragraph: ‘‘The following descriptions 

of positions for the bands in the 

occupational families illustrate 

examples of the types of positions 

included.’’ In addition, to ensure pay 

equity, it is the intent to set the base pay 

for an employee at the minimum base 

pay of the pay band to which the 

employee’s position is classified. For 

clarification the Federal Register notice 

has been changed as follows: In section 

V.B.2, the following has been added to 

the end of the first paragraph, ‘‘If the 

employee’s base pay is less than the 

minimum rate for his/her position’s 

assigned demonstration project pay 

band, the base pay rate will be increased 

to the minimum of that pay band.’’ 

(2) Comment: Conversion from NSPS 

is not redressing the problems created 

by the GS–Demo–NSPS–Demo sequence 

at ARDEC over the last 5–10 years. The 

Acquisition Demo created GS–14/15 

bands, where once selected, an 

employee could move up, without 

competition, through the entire pay 

scale of the band. In NSPS, ARDEC 

‘‘gated’’ some of these employees, such 

that their max pay would be capped at 

essentially a GS–14, Step 10, level. In 

other words, the full range of 

opportunity was taken away from some 

people. It would seem reasonable that 

under this Lab Demo proposal, any 

employee who was competitively 

selected for a GS–14/15 band in the 

past, be converted to a Pay Band V 

under this Lab Demo. 

Response: Employees will convert to 

the appropriate band based on 

classification for the position they 

occupy at the time of conversion. Table 

1 (Pay Band Charts) identifies the 

possible bands to which employees may 

convert. Any employee that has a base 

pay that exceeds the band will be place 

on indefinite pay retention until such 

time as their pay falls within the Normal 

Pay Range. No change to the Federal 

Register notice is required. 

(3) Comment: Paragraph V.B.4, 

Transition Equity. Recommend this 

paragraph also apply to GS employees 

under paragraph V.A. 

Response: It has been determined that 

adding the provision of Transition 

Equity in the NSPS conversion section 

to the GS conversion section of the 

Federal Register notice is appropriate. 

The notice has been changed by adding 

the following paragraphs to the end of 

section V.A. as a new paragraph 6: 

‘‘6. During the first 12 months 

following conversion to the 

demonstration project, management 

may approve certain adjustments within 

the pay band for pay equity reasons 

stemming from conversion. For 

example, if an employee would have 

been otherwise promoted but 

demonstration project pay band 

placement no longer provides the 

opportunity for promotion, a pay equity 

adjustment may be authorized provided 

the adjustment does not cause the 

employee’s base pay to exceed the 

maximum rate of his or her assigned pay 

band and the employee’s performance 

warrants an adjustment. The decision to 

grant a pay equity adjustment is at the 

sole discretion of the ARDEC Director 

and is not subject to employee appeal 

procedures. 

During the first 12 months following 

conversion, management may approve 

an adjustment of not more than 20 

percent, provided the adjustment does 

not cause the employee’s base pay to 

exceed the maximum rate of his or her 

assigned pay band and the employee’s 

performance warrants an adjustment, to 

mitigate compensation inequities that 

may be caused by artifacts of the process 

of conversion into STRL pay bands.’’ 

(4) Comment: Recommend deleting 

the last part of the paragraph V.A.5.a. 

and V.B.7.a, ‘‘and may have their initial 

period extended in accordance with the 

demonstration project regulation and 

implementing issuances.’’ This is a 

change in contract with a person as that 

person was promoted with the 

understanding of only having a one-year 

probationary period and this is not 

considered reasonable. 

Response: It has been determined that 

to change an employee’s original 

probationary period contract, as defined 

when hired, during conversion to the 

ARDEC Lab Demo would be an 

unreasonable change to the employee’s 

employment contract. The Federal 

Register notice paragraphs V.A.5.a. and 

V.B.7.a, have been changed by deleting 

the last part of the paragraph, ‘‘and may 

have their initial period extended in 

accordance with the demonstration 

project regulation and implementing 

issuances.’’ 

F. Contributing Factors 

Two similar comments regarding 

Contributing Factors were received; and 

the response is provided below. 

(1) Comments (two similar comments 

received): The Contribution-Based 

Compensation System (CBCS) is based 

on 6 factors, which duplicate to a great 

degree the GS Position Classification 

system, and introduce duplication and 

unnecessary administrative costs. In one 

case, Factor 6 on Resource Management 

actually proposes to add more words, 

and more confusion, to the legal 

definition of appropriation laws (page 

55205). 

Response: The factors, descriptors, 

and discriminators are intended to be 

used as guides for determining the level 

of contribution for each employee across 

all bands and occupational families. 

They are not intended to, nor does the 

Federal Register notice prescribe, 

changes to the legal definition of the 

appropriation laws. However, additional 

clarity has been achieved by revising 

some of the Descriptors and 

Discriminators in Appendix C of the 

Federal Register notice. 

G. Pay Pool Funding 

One comment regarding Pay Pool 

Funding was received. The response is 

provided below. 

(1) Comment: The 2 percent base pay 

and 1 percent bonus funding levels 

appear to be too low for proper 

recognition of the workforce. 

Response: The Federal Register notice 

identifies these pay pool funding levels 

as minimums and permits the ARDEC 

Director to increase these funding levels 

as needed. These minimums are base 

pay pool funding levels, not the limit to 

the total compensation adjustments for 

an individual employee. The system 

does not preclude other recognition/ 

awards to employees that are not part of 

the CBCS compensation. No change to 

the Federal Register notice is required. 

H. Pay Bands 

Three comments regarding Pay Bands 

were received; and the responses are 

provided below. 

(1) Comment: (Two similar comments 

received.) Gating within bands, similar 

to what was done under the NSPS 

system is highly undesirable. The 

system that is put in place should 

prevent ARDEC managers from setting 

arbitrary limits on the pay bands and 

limiting the flexibility. 

Response: The ARDEC Lab Demo 

project has reduced the need for gating 

(control points) within a band by 

placing salary limits on bands that are 

commensurate with the level and 

difficulty of work assignments across 

the occupational families for the given 

bands. The notice does have provisions 

to use control points should the need 

arise in the future based on experience 

in operating the system to ensure 

employees are appropriately paid for the 

work they perform. No change to the 

Federal Register notice is required. 

(2) Comment: The equivalent NSPS 

Pay Band by Occupational Family Table 

appears to be missing the YH category 

personnel and there are at least two at 

Picatinny, ARDEC. Where do they fit in? 

Response: There was an oversight in 

the initial Federal Register notice. A 

revision to this table was made by 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3748 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

adding the NSPS YH category into Table 

1 (Equivalent NSPS Pay Bands). 

Additionally, the General Health 

Science Series (0601) was moved from 

the Business and Technical to the 

Engineering and Science Occupational 

Family in Appendix B of the Federal 

Register notice to accommodate 

employees in the YH category. 

I. Personnel Management Board 

One comment regarding the Personnel 

Management Board was received. The 

response is provided below. 

(1) Comment: It appears that the PMB 

is assuming responsibilities that should 

reside with Line Management. The 

responsibility of each should be clearly 

delineated. Suggest deleting the 

following paragraphs as these are more 

management functions to be performed 

by the line managers than the PMB. 

II.G.2.m. ensure in-house budget 

discipline 

II.G.2.n. manage the number of 

employees by Occupational Family and 

pay band. 

Response: After further review the 

following management functions were 

determined to be not required for the 

PMB as they are line management 

responsibilities as such. The following 

paragraphs were deleted: 

II.G.2.m. ensure in-house budget 

discipline. 

II.G.2.n. manage the number of 

employees by Occupational Family and 

pay band. 

J. Employee Developmental Programs 

One comment regarding Employee 

Developmental Programs was received; 

and the response is provided below. 

(1) Comment: It is suggested that the 

language in paragraph II.G.2.o.— 

‘‘Developmental Opportunity Programs’’ be 

changed to ‘‘Employee Developmental 

Programs’’ to be consistent with 

language of paragraph III.G. 

Response: There is an inconsistent 

use of terminology in the Initial Federal 

Register notice. Developmental 

Opportunity Programs should be 

changed to Employee Developmental 

Programs for consistency. The Federal 

Register notice has been changed as 

follows: paragraph II.G.2.o.—Changed 

from ‘‘Developmental Opportunity 

Programs’’ to ‘‘Employee Developmental 

Programs’’. 

K. Annual Appraisal Cycle 

Two comments regarding Annual 

Appraisal Cycle were received; and the 

responses provided below. 

(1) Comment: The Contribution-Based 

Compensation System requires a midpoint review be conducted for all 

employees. For employees entering the 

Lab Demo late in the rating cycle this 

may be an issue. 

Response: The Federal Register notice 

did not adequately account for 

conducting midpoint reviews for 

employees entering the Lab Demo 

project late in the rating cycle. The 

notice has been changed as follows: In 

paragraph ‘‘III.C.4 Annual Appraisal 

Cycle and Rating Process,’’ the verbiage 

in the third paragraph was changed 

from ‘‘At least one review, normally the 

mid-point review, will be documented 

as a progress review.’’ to, ‘‘At least one 

review, normally the mid-point review, 

will be documented as a progress 

review. Exceptions may be established 

by the PMB and approved by the 

ARDEC Director based on employees 

that will be in the Lab Demo for less 

than 180 days at the end of the rating 

cycle.’’ 

(2) Comment: The scoring system 

seems unbalanced over the bands with 

different levels to score. The program 

should provide for more levels for each 

pay band level, either by adding a ‘‘very 

high’’ category to each or use of the five 

bands as in Level II. 

Response: Employees may score 

anywhere within the full spectrum of 

scores for their occupational family. The 

‘‘very high’’ categorical rating exists at 

the top pay band level for each 

occupational family and provides the 

potential for employees in a top pay 

band level to score above their band 

level as can employees in other band 

levels. The scoring range for employees 

in pay band II of the Engineer and 

Science and Business and Technical 

occupational family is greater than other 

pay bands reflecting the broader range 

(equivalent to GS–05 to GS–11 grades) 

of contribution levels contained in that 

pay band. The additional categorical 

ratings (Medium High and Medium 

Low) in pay band II facilitate the ability 

to assess and categorize employee 

contributions within pay band II. No 

change to the notice is needed. 

L. Probationary Periods 

One comment regarding Probationary 

Periods was received. The response is 

provided below. 

(1) Comment: Consider adding written 

documentation for reassignments of 

supervisors on probationary periods 

similar to what is being done for the 

employee probationary period. 

Response: There is an inconsistent 

requirement for written documentation 

for different probationary periods. It is 

appropriate to document the 

supervisory probationary period 

reassignments in the same manner as 

required for the employee probationary 

period. The notice has been modified to 

add the following to paragraph III.D.9, 

‘‘When a supervisor determines to 

reassign a probationary supervisor to a 

non-supervisory position during the 

probationary period because his/her 

work performance or conduct is 

unacceptable, the probationary 

employee’s supervisor will provide 

written notification subject to higher 

level management approval.’’ 

M. Position Classification 

One comment regarding Position 

Classification was received. The 

response is provided below. 

(1) Comment: Should specialty codes 

be used for Lab Demo position 

descriptions? Can any position 

description be established without 

them? Suggest changing from ‘‘will’’ to 

‘‘may’’ or remove from the Federal 

Register notice. 

Response: Concur with the 

recommendation to change ‘‘will’’ to 

‘‘may’’ in paragraph III.B.2. 

N. Reduction in Force 

Three comments regarding reduction 

in force were received. The responses 

are provided below. 

(1) Comment: Do Specialty Work 

Codes have any effect if ARDEC were to 

conduct a reduction in force? 

Response: The Lab Demo Federal 

Register notice does not mandate the 

use of Specialty Work Codes on position 

descriptions; and, therefore, the notice 

will not specifically make the use of 

Specialty Work Codes mandatory when 

conducting a reduction in force (RIF). 

No change to the Federal Register 

notice is required. 

(2) Comment: Paragraph III.H— 

Recommend changing the RIF credit 

lines to define them as 3 points below 

the Expected Overall Contribution Score 

(EOCS). Using 94 percent would mean 

3 Overall Contribution Score (OCS) 

points for an EOCS of 50 and 6 OCS 

points for an EOCS of 100. Also, since 

ratings are not given to people on a 

Contribution Improvement Period (CIP), 

recommend deleting the requirement for 

OCS to be less than 92 percent (actually 

4 points) as well as CIP to get 0 years 

of credit. Define the year as the year that 

the employee enters a CIP, so as not to 

penalize two years should the CIP 

overlap two years. 

Response: The use of percent was in 

error and the intent was to define the 

years of service augmentation based 

upon the delta between an employee’s 

Assessed Overall Contribution Score 

(AOCS) and an employee’s EOCS at the 

end of a rating cycle. Additionally, the 

Federal Register notice has been 

adjusted (see service augmentation rule 

3 below) to clarify when zero years of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3749 

service augmentation are applied. The 

following are the service augmentation 

rules: 

1. Seven (7) years of service 

augmentation for each year the AOCS is 

greater than or equal to the EOCS minus 

3 (AOCS ≥ EOCS ¥3). 

2. Four (4) years of service 

augmentation for each year the AOCS is 

less than the EOCS minus 3 (AOCS < 

EOCS ¥3). 

3. Zero (0) years of service 

augmentation for each year the 

employee was placed on a CIP at any 

time during the rating cycle. 

(3) Comment: The RIF procedures 

have a predictable outcome on the 

rating process. If ARDEC gets into a long 

downsizing cycle, such as in the 1990s, 

rating will be progressively exaggerated, 

until almost all employees get the seven 

years of extra credit. This will return the 

workforce to the standard, GS RIF 

ranking of tenure, veterans’ preference 

and years of service. 

Response: The Lab Demo project has 

been designed to improve the discipline 

of the rating process and reduces the 

possibility of inflated ratings. No change 

to the Federal Register notice is 

required. 

O. Hiring Authority 

One comment regarding Hiring 

Authority was received. The response is 

provided below. 

(1) Comment: For paragraph III.D.3.a, 

change the beginning to ‘‘The ARDEC 

has and is forecasted to have for the 

near future an urgent need.* * *’’ This 

is not a one time need, but will 

continue. 

Response: The verbiage in the Federal 

Register notice does not address the 

anticipated near future hiring need. The 

following rewording provides for the 

current and future hiring needs of 

ARDEC. Change paragraph III.D.3.a from 

The ARDEC has an urgent need * * *’’ 

to ‘‘The ARDEC has and is forecasted to 

have for the foreseeable future an urgent 

need.* * *’’ This is not a one time need, 

but will continue. 

P. Projected Annual Expenses 

One comment regarding Projected 

Annual Expenses was received; and the 

response is provided below. 

(1) Comment: The costs need to be revisited and validated. NSPS costs of 

implementation need to be obtained and 

used as a comparable set of figures. The 

operating costs of NSPS, meaning the 

paperwork, the administrative support 

costs, the automation costs, the 

employee and supervisor time spent 

feeding the system need to be compiled. 

There needs to be some realistic 

comparison between the value of a 2% 

incentive to the life cycle cost of 

operating a system. The investment 

ARDEC has made in its previous 

attempts to shed the GS system must by 

now total millions. By the way, the $85k 

shown does not cover the salary of the 

lead admin officer for the project, so it 

can hardly be right. 

Response: The projected annual 

expenses in the initial Federal Register 

notice were determined based on 

benchmarks of other lab demo projects 

and do not include the normal 

managerial labor expenses typically 

incurred in the execution of other 

personnel systems. Subsequently, 

ARDEC has obtained and developed 

additional cost data and revised Table 6 

of the Federal Register notice as 

follows: 

TABLE 6—PROJECTED ANNUAL EXPENSES

FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 

Training ................................................................................................................... 0K ........... 15K ......... 10K ......... 5K ........... 5K 

Project Evaluation ................................................................................................... 40K ......... 80K ......... 30K ......... 30K ......... 30K 

Automation .............................................................................................................. 97K ......... 400K ....... 400K ....... 50K ......... 50K 

Totals ............................................................................................................... 137K ....... 495K ....... 440K ....... 85K ......... 85K 

3. Access to Flexibilities of Other STRLs 

Flexibilities published in this Federal 

Register notice shall be available for use 

by the STRLs previously enumerated in 

section 9902(c)(2) of title 5, United 

States Code, which are now designated 

in section 1105 of the NDAA for FY 

2010, Public Law 111–84, 123 Stat. 

2486, October 28, 2009, if they wish to 

adopt them in accordance with DoD 

Instruction 1400.37; pages 73248 to 

73252 of volume 73, Federal Register; 

and after the fulfilling of any collective 

bargaining obligations. 

Dated: January 13, 2011. 

Morgan F. Park, 

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison 

Officer, Department of Defense. 

Table of Contents 

I. Executive Summary 

II. Introduction 

A. Purpose 

B. Problems With the Present System 

C. Changes Required/Expected Benefits 

D. Participating Organizations 

E. Participating Employees and Union 

Representation 

F. Project Design 

G. Personnel Management Board 

III. Personnel System Changes 

A. Pay Banding 

B. Classification 

C. Contribution-Based Contribution System 

(CBCS) 

D. Hiring Authority 

E. Internal Placement 

F. Pay Administration 

G. Employee Development 

H. Reduction-in-Force (RIF) Procedures 

IV. Implementation Training 

V. Conversion 

A. Conversion From the GS System to the 

Demonstration Project 

B. Conversion From NSPS to the 

Demonstration Project 

C. Conversion From Other Personnel 

Systems 

D. Movement Out of the Demonstration 

Project 

VI. Other Provisions 

A. Personnel Administration 

B. Automation 

C. Experimentation and Revision 

VII. Project Duration 

VIII. Evaluation Plan 

A. Overview 

B. Evaluation Model 

C. Evaluation 

D. Method of Data Collection 

IX. Demonstration Project Costs 

A. Cost Discipline 

B. Developmental Costs 

X. Required Waivers to Law and Regulation 

A. Waivers to Title 5, U.S.C. 

B. Waivers to Title 5, CFR 

Appendix A: ARDEC Employees by Duty 

Locations 

Appendix B: Occupational Series by 

Occupational Family 

Appendix C: Contribution Factors and Level 

Descriptors 

Appendix D: Intervention Model 

I. Executive Summary 

The Armament Research, 

Development and Engineering Center 

includes the ARDEC organizations at 

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ; Watervliet 

Arsenal, NY; Rock Island Arsenal, IL; 

and ARDEC employees with duty 

stations at other sites. The intent of this 

demonstration project is to cover all 

employees, subject to bargaining unit 

agreement. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3750 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

The ARDEC provides integrated 

science, technology, and engineering 

solutions to address the armament, 

munitions, and fire control needs for the 

Army. The ARDEC’s core competency is 

working with weapon systems at all 

stages of the materiel life cycle. The 

ARDEC maintains the following 

fundamental capabilities: 

(1) Armaments and Weapons; 

(2) Fire Control; 

(3) Energetics, Warheads, and 

Ammunition; 

(4) Ammunition Logistics; 

(5) Explosive Ordnance Disposal; and 

(6) Homeland Defense Technology. 

In order to sustain these unique 

capabilities, the ARDEC must be able to 

hire, retain, and continually motivate 

enthusiastic, innovative, and highlyeducated scientists and engineers, 

supported by accomplished business 

management and administrative 

professionals, as well as a skilled 

administrative and technical support 

staff. 

The goal of the project is to enhance 

the quality and professionalism of the 

ARDEC workforce through 

improvements in the efficiency and 

effectiveness of the human resource 

system. The project interventions will 

strive to achieve the best workforce for 

the ARDEC mission, adjust the 

workforce for change, and improve 

workforce satisfaction. With some 

modifications, this project mirrors the 

STRL personnel management 

demonstration project, designed by the 

U.S. Army Edgewood Chemical 

Biological Center (ECBC). The ARDEC 

Demonstration Project was built on the 

ECBC concepts and uses much of the 

same language; however, it includes 

several concepts from the Air Force 

Research Laboratory (AFRL), Naval 

Research Laboratory (NRL), and the DoD 

Civilian Acquisition Workforce (Acq 

Demo) personnel management 

demonstration projects. Of significant 

note is the inclusion of a contributionbased compensation and assessment 

system similar to that used in the Acq 

Demo program. The results of the 

project will be evaluated within five 

years of implementation. 

II. Introduction 

A. Purpose 

The purpose of the project is to 

demonstrate that the effectiveness of 

DoD STRLs can be enhanced by 

expanding opportunities available to 

employees and by allowing greater 

managerial control over personnel 

functions through a more responsive 

and flexible personnel system. Federal 

laboratories need more efficient, cost 

effective, and timely processes and 

methods to acquire and retain a highlycreative, productive, educated, and 

trained workforce. This project, in its 

entirety, attempts to improve 

employees’ opportunities and provide 

managers, at the lowest practical level, 

the authority, control, and flexibility 

needed to achieve the highest quality 

organization, and hold them 

accountable for the proper exercise of 

this authority within the framework of 

an improved personnel management 

system. 

Many aspects of a demonstration 

project are experimental. Modifications 

may be made from time to time as 

experience is gained, results are 

analyzed, and conclusions are reached 

on how the system is working. The 

provisions of this project plan will not 

be modified, or extended to individuals 

or groups of employees not included in 

the project plan without the approval of 

the DUSD(CPP). The provisions of DoDI 

1400.37 are to be followed for any 

modifications, adoptions, or changes to 

this demonstration project plan. 

B. Problems With the Present System 

The ARDEC has participated in a 

number of personnel systems and 

personnel demonstrations over the past 

25 years. These include the current Civil 

Service General Schedule (GS) system 

(80 percent of ARDEC employees are 

currently in this GS system); Acq Demo 

Project from 2001 to 2006; and NSPS 

from 2006 to the present (20 percent of 

ARDEC employees are currently in 

NSPS). The ARDEC’s experience with 

each of these prior personnel systems 

was that, although each had positive 

features, each also had negative aspects. 

As a result of the ARDEC’s experience, 

it was determined that certain features 

from the earlier systems were 

worthwhile to carry forward and certain 

shortcomings/limitations needed to be 

corrected or alleviated. 

The current Civil Service GS system 

has existed in essentially the same form 

since 1949. Work is classified into one 

of fifteen overlapping pay ranges that 

correspond with the fifteen grades. Base 

pay is set at one of those fifteen grades 

and the ten interim steps within each 

grade. The Classification Act of 1949 

rigidly defines types of work by 

occupational series and grade, with very 

precise qualifications for each job. This 

system does not quickly or easily 

respond to new ways of designing work 

and changes in the work itself. 

The performance management model 

that has existed since the passage of the 

Civil Service Reform Act in 1980 has 

come under extreme criticism. 

Employees frequently report there is 

inadequate communication of 

performance expectations and feedback 

on performance. There are perceived 

inaccuracies in performance ratings 

with general agreement that the ratings 

are inflated and often unevenly 

distributed by grade, occupation, and 

geographic location. 

The need to change the current hiring 

system is essential as the ARDEC must 

be able to recruit and retain scientific, 

engineering, acquisition support and 

other professionals and skilled 

technicians. The ARDEC must be able to 

compete with the private sector for the 

best talent and be able to make job offers 

in a timely manner with the attendant 

bonuses and incentives to attract high 

quality employees and be in compliance 

with public law. 

Finally, current limitations on 

training, retraining, and otherwise 

developing employees make it difficult 

to correct skill imbalances and to 

prepare current employees for new lines 

of work to meet changing missions and 

emerging technologies. 

The ARDEC’s proposed personnel 

management demonstration project, by 

building on previous strengths and 

addressing shortcomings, is intended to 

provide the highest potential for 

movement to a single system that will 

meet the needs of the ARDEC and all its 

employees. 

C. Changes Required/Expected Benefits 

The primary benefit expected from 

this demonstration project is greater 

organizational effectiveness through 

increased employee satisfaction. The 

long-standing Department of the Navy 

‘‘China Lake’’ and National Institute of 

Standards and Technology (NIST) 

demonstration projects have produced 

impressive statistics on increased job 

satisfaction and quality of employees 

versus that for the Federal workforce in 

general. This project will demonstrate 

that a human resource system tailored to 

the mission and needs of the ARDEC 

workforce will facilitate increased: 

1. Quality in the workforce and 

resultant products; 

2. timeliness of key personnel 

processes; 

3. retention of excellent performers; 

4. success in recruitment of personnel 

with critical skills; 

5. management authority and 

accountability; 

6. satisfaction of customers; and 

7. workforce satisfaction. 

An evaluation model was developed 

for the Director, Defense, Research, and 

Engineering (DDR&E) in conjunction 

with STRL service representatives and 

the Office of Personnel Management 

(OPM). The model will measure the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3751 

effectiveness of this demonstration 

project, as modified in this plan, and 

will be used to measure the results of 

specific personnel system changes. 

D. Participating Organizations 

The ARDEC is comprised of 

employees headquartered at Picatinny 

Arsenal, NJ. The ARDEC employees are 

geographically dispersed at the 

locations shown in Appendix A. It 

should be noted that some sites 

currently employ fewer than ten people 

and that the sites may change should 

ARDEC reorganize or realign. Successor 

organizations will continue coverage in 

the demonstration project. 

E. Participating Employees and Union 

Representation 

This demonstration project will cover 

approximately 3,400 ARDEC civilian 

employees under title 5 U.S.C. in the 

occupational series listed in Appendix 

B. The project plan does not cover 

members of the Senior Executive 

Service (SES), Scientific and 

Professional (ST) employees, Federal 

Wage System (FWS) employees, 

employees presently covered by the 

Defense Civilian Intelligence Personnel 

System (DCIPS), or Department of Army 

(DA), Army Command centrally funded 

interns and centrally funded students 

employed under the Student Career 

Experience Program (SCEP). 

The International Federation of 

Professional and Technical Engineers 

(IFPTE) Local 1437; the American 

Federation of Government Employees 

(AFGE) Local 225; the American 

Federation of Government Employees 

(AFGE) Local 15; and the National 

Federation of Federal Employees (NFFE) 

Local 2109 represent a majority of the 

ARDEC employees. Of those employees 

assigned to the ARDEC, approximately 

75 percent are represented by labor 

unions. 

To foster union acceptance of the 

ARDEC’s proposed personnel 

demonstration project, initial 

discussions with the four unions began 

in November 2009. The ARDEC will 

continue to fulfill its obligation to 

consult and/or negotiate with all labor 

organizations in accordance with 5 

U.S.C. 4703(f) and 7117, as applicable. 

F. Project Design 

In October 2009, the 2010 National 

Defense Authorization Act directed the 

ARDEC to transition to a laboratory 

personnel management demonstration 

project. Following review and analysis 

of existing DoD demonstration projects, 

the ARDEC senior leadership decided to 

adapt the ECBC model, one of the latest 

Army projects. A series of focus groups, 

benchmarking and other sensing 

sessions were completed to determine 

the unique ARDEC needs and 

requirements. One key departure from 

the ECBC model is the shift from their 

Performance Management System to a 

Contribution-Based Compensation 

System (CBCS), similar to the Acq Demo 

project. 

G. Personnel Management Board (PMB) 

1. ARDEC will create a PMB to 

oversee and monitor the fair, equitable, 

and consistent implementation of the 

provisions of the demonstration project 

to include establishment of internal 

controls and accountability. Members of 

the board will be senior leaders 

appointed by the ARDEC Director. As 

needed, ad hoc members (such as labor 

counsel, human resource 

representatives, etc.) will serve as 

advisory members to the board. 

2. The PMB is responsible for 

establishing the implementation and 

operating rules as required. At a 

minimum, duties executed by the board 

will be to: 

a. Determine the composition of the 

pay pools in accordance with the 

guidelines of this proposal and internal 

procedures; 

b. review operation of pay pools and 

provide guidance to pay pool managers; 

c. oversee disputes in pay pool issues; 

d. formulate and manage the civilian 

pay pool budget; 

e. formulate and manage the civilian 

bonus pool budget; 

f. determine hiring, reassignment, and 

promotion base pay as well as 

exceptions to Contribution-Based 

Compensation System base pay 

increases; 

g. conduct classification review and 

oversight, monitor and adjust 

classification practices, and decide 

board classification issues; 

h. approve major changes in position 

structure; 

i. address issues associated with 

multiple pay systems during the 

demonstration project; 

j. manage standard Contribution 

Factors and Descriptors; 

k. identify and implement 

improvements to demonstration project 

procedures and policies; 

l. review requests for Supervisory/ 

Team Leader Base Pay Adjustments and 

provide recommendations to the 

Director; 

m. develop policies and procedures 

for administering Employee 

Developmental Programs; 

n. ensure that all employees are 

treated in a fair and equitable manner in 

accordance with all policies, 

regulations, and guidelines covering this 

demonstration project; 

o. monitor the evaluation of the 

project; 

p. establish and manage the 

Accelerated Compensation for 

Developmental Positions (ACDP); and 

q. Establish rules and procedures for 

denying or reducing GPI for employees 

whose contributions are in region A 

(above the NPR). 

III. Personnel System Changes 

A. Pay Banding 

The design of the ARDEC pay banding 

system takes advantage of the many 

reviews performed by DA, DoD, OPM, 

and others. The design also has the 

benefit of being preceded by exhaustive 

studies of pay banding systems 

currently practiced in the Federal 

sector, to include those practiced by the 

China Lake experiment and NIST. The 

ARDEC pay banding system will replace 

the current GS grade and NSPS pay 

band structures. 

1. Occupational Families 

Occupations with similar 

characteristics will be grouped together 

into one of three Occupational Families 

with career paths and pay band levels 

designed to facilitate pay progression. 

These Occupational Families are 

Engineering and Science (E&S), 

Business and Technical (B&T), and 

General (GEN). Each Occupational 

Family’s career path will be composed 

of pay bands corresponding to 

recognized advancement and career 

progression patterns within the covered 

occupations. These career paths and 

their pay bands will replace the NSPS 

pay band structure and the individual 

GS grades and will not be the same for 

each Occupational Family. Each 

Occupational Family will be divided 

into three to six pay bands. Employees 

track into an Occupational Family based 

on their current OPM classification 

series as provided in Appendix B. All 

employees are initially assigned to the 

Occupational Family and pay band in 

which their comparable grade fits based 

on position classification using the GS 

classification standards. Comparison to 

the GS grades is used in setting the 

upper and lower base pay dollar limits 

of the pay band levels with the 

exception of Pay Band VI of the E&S 

Occupational Family (refer to III.A.3). 

The current occupations have been 

examined; and their characteristics and 

distribution have served as guidelines in 

the development of the three 

Occupational Families. The following 

descriptions of positions in the pay 

bands of each occupational family 

illustrate examples of the types of 

positions included. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3752 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

a. Engineering and Science (E&S) (Pay 

Plan DB): This Occupational Family 

includes positions as defined in 

Appendix B. Specific course work or 

educational degrees are required for 

these occupations. Six bands have been 

established for the E&S career path: 

(refer to Table 1). 

(1) Band I includes student trainee 

positions. 

(2) Band II includes developmental 

positions. 

(3) Band III includes full-performance 

technical positions. 

(4) Band IV includes technical 

specialist and first level supervisory 

positions. 

(5) Band V includes senior technical 

and managerial positions. 

(6) Band VI includes positions 

classified above the GS–15 level. 

b. Business and Technical (B&T) (Pay 

Plan DE): This Occupational Family 

includes positions as defined in 

Appendix B. Employees in these 

positions may or may not require 

specific course work or educational 

degrees. Five bands have been 

established for the B&T career path: 

(refer to Table 1). 

(1) Band I includes student trainee 

positions. 

(2) Band II includes developmental 

positions. 

(3) Band III includes full-performance 

technical and first level supervisory 

positions. 

(4) Band IV includes senior technical 

specialist and supervisory positions. 

(5) Band V includes managerial 

positions. 

c. General Support (GEN) (Pay Plan 

DK): This Occupational Family includes 

positions as defined in Appendix B. 

Employees in these positions may or 

may not require specific course work or 

educational degrees. Three bands have 

been established for the GEN career 

path: (refer to Table 1). 

(1) Band I covers entry-level and 

student positions. 

(2) Band II covers full-performance 

positions. 

(3) Band III includes supervisory and 

senior positions. 

2. Pay Band Design 

The pay bands for the Occupational 

Families and how they relate to the 

current GS/NSPS frameworks are shown 

in Table 1. 

TABLE 1—PAY BAND CHARTS

Occupational 

family 

Equivalent GS grades 

I II III IV V VI 

E&S ............................. GS–01–04 .......... GS–05–11 .......... GS–12–13 .......... GS–14 ................ GS–15 ................ >GS–15 

Business & Technical .. GS–01–04 .......... GS–05–11 .......... GS–12–13 .......... GS–14 ................ GS–15 ................

General Support .......... GS–01–04 .......... GS–05—08 ........ GS–9 .................. ............................ ............................

Occupational 

family 

Equivalent NSPS Pay bands1, 2

I II III IV V VI 

E&S .............................

(DB) .............................

YP–1 .................. YD–1, YF–1, YF– 

2, YP–1.

YD–2, YF–2 ....... YD–3, YF–2, YF– 

3, YH–3.

YD–3, .................

YF–3 ...................

Business & Technical ..

(DE) .............................

YP–1, .................

YB–1, .................

YE–1 ..................

YA–1, YA–2, YB– 

1, YB–2, YB–3, 

YC–1, YC–2, 

YE–1, YE–2, 

YE–3, YP–1.

YA–2, YB–3, YC– 

2, YE–3, YE–4.

YA–3, YC–2, 

YC–3.

YA–3, .................

YC–3 ..................

General Support ..........

(DK) .............................

YB–1, .................

YE–1, .................

YP–1 ..................

YB–1, YB–2, YE– 

1, YE–2, YP–1.

YB–2, YE–2, YP– 

1.

............................ ............................

1 NSPS Pay Bands overlap Lab Demo bands and Occupational Families. 

2Student Career Experience Program participants in YP pay bands are not included in this Demonstration Project. 

As the rates of the GS are increased 

due to the annual general pay increases, 

the upper and lower base pay rates of 

the pay bands will also be adjusted. 

Since pay progression through the 

bands depends directly on contribution, 

there will be no scheduled WithinGrade Increases (WGIs) or Quality Step 

Increases (QSIs) for former GS 

employees once the pay banding system 

is in place. GS special rate schedules 

and NSPS Targeted Local Market 

Supplements (TLMS) will no longer be 

applicable to demonstration project 

employees. Special provisions have 

been included to ensure no loss of pay 

upon conversion (refer to III.F.11 

Staffing Supplements). Except for those 

receiving a staffing supplement and 

employees on pay retention, employees 

will receive locality pay in addition to 

their base pay in the same amount and 

to the same extent as established for GS 

employees in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 

5304 and 5304a. However, adjusted pay 

(base + locality) for employees in Band 

V or below cannot exceed Executive 

Level IV. 3. Science and Engineering 

Positions Classified Above GS–15. 

The career path for the E&S 

Occupational Family includes a pay 

band VI to provide the ability to 

accommodate positions having duties 

and responsibilities that exceed the GS– 

15 classification criteria. This pay band 

is based on the Above GS–15 Position 

concept found in other STRL personnel 

management demonstration projects 

that was created to solve a critical 

classification problem. The STRLs have 

positions warranting classification 

above GS–15 because of the technical 

expertise requirements including 

inherent supervisory and managerial 

responsibilities. However, these 

positions are not considered to be 

appropriately classified as Scientific or 

Professional Positions (STs) because of 

the degree of supervision and level of 

managerial responsibilities. Neither are 

these positions appropriately classified 

as Senior Executive Service (SES) 

positions because of the requirement for 

advanced specialized scientific or 

engineering expertise, and because the 

positions are not at the level of the 

general managerial authority and impact 

that is required for an SES position. 

The original Above GS–15 Position 

concept was to be tested for a five-year 

period. The number of trial positions 

was set at 40 with periodic reviews to 

determine appropriate position 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3753 

requirements. The Above GS–15 

Position concept is currently being 

evaluated by DoD management for its 

effectiveness, continued applicability to 

the current STRL scientific, engineering, 

and technology workforce needs and 

appropriate allocation of billets based 

on mission requirements. The degree to 

which the laboratory plans to 

participate in this concept and develop 

classification, compensation, and 

performance management policy, 

guidance, and implementation 

processes will be based on the final 

outcome of the DoD evaluation. 

B. Classification 

1. Occupational Series 

The GS classification system has over 

400 occupational series which are 

divided into 23 occupational groupings. 

The ARDEC currently has positions in 

approximately 60 occupational series 

that fall into approximately 16 

occupational groupings. All positions 

listed in Appendix B will be included 

in the classification structure. 

Provisions will be made for including 

other occupations in response to 

changing missions. 

2. Classification Standards and Position 

Descriptions 

The ARDEC may use an automated 

classification system. The current OPM 

classification standards will be used for 

the identification of proper series and 

occupational titles of positions within 

the demonstration project. The grading 

criteria in the OPM classification 

standards will be used as a framework 

to develop new and simplified pay band 

factor level descriptors for each pay 

band determination. The objective is to 

record the essential criteria for each pay 

band within each Occupational Family 

by stating the characteristics of the 

work, the responsibilities of the 

position, the competencies required, 

and the expected contributions. The 

Factor Descriptors will serve as both 

classification criteria and contribution 

assessment criteria and may be found in 

Appendix C. New position descriptions 

will replace the current position/job 

descriptions. The Factor Descriptors of 

each pay band will serve as an 

important component in the new 

position description, which will also 

include position-specific information 

and provide data element information 

pertinent to the job. The new 

descriptions will be easier to prepare, 

minimize the amount of writing time, 

and make the position description a 

more useful and accurate tool for other 

personnel management functions. 

Specialty work codes (narrative 

descriptions) may be used to further 

differentiate types of work and the 

competencies required for particular 

positions within an Occupational 

Family and pay band. Each code 

represents a specialization or type of 

work within the occupation. 

3. Fair Labor Standards Act 

Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) 

exemption and non-exemption 

determinations will be consistent with 

criteria found in 5 CFR part 551. All 

demonstration project positions are 

covered by the FLSA unless they meet 

the criteria for exemption. Positions will 

be evaluated as needed by comparing 

the duties and responsibilities assigned 

the pay band factor level descriptors for 

each pay band level, and the 5 CFR part 

551 FLSA criteria. As a general rule, the 

FLSA status of a position can be 

matched to an Occupational Family, 

career path, and pay band level as 

indicated in Table 2. For example, 

positions classified in Pay Band I of the 

E&S Occupational Family are typically 

nonexempt, meaning they are covered 

by the overtime entitlements prescribed 

by the FLSA. An exception to this 

guideline includes supervisors/ 

managers whose primary duty meets the 

definitions outlined in the OPM GS 

Supervisory Guide. Therefore, 

supervisors/managers in any of the pay 

bands who meet the foregoing criteria 

are exempt from the FLSA. Supervisors 

with classification authority will make 

the determinations on a case-by-case 

basis by comparing assigned duties and 

responsibilities and pay band factor 

level descriptors to the 5 CFR part 551 

FLSA criteria. Additionally, the advice 

and assistance of the servicing Civilian 

Personnel Advisory Center (CPAC) will 

be obtained in making determinations. 

The position descriptions will not be 

the sole basis for the determination. The 

basis for exemption will be documented 

and attached to each position 

description. Exemption criteria will be 

narrowly construed and applied only to 

those employees who clearly meet the 

spirit of the exemption. Changes will be 

documented and provided to the CPAC. 

TABLE 2—FLSA STATUS

[Pay bands] 

Occupational family I II III IV V VI 

E&S ......................................................................................................................................... N N/E E E E E 

B&T ......................................................................................................................................... N N/E E E E 

GEN ......................................................................................................................................... N N E 

N—Non-Exempt from FLSA; E—Exempt from FLSA; and N/E—Exemption status determined on a case-by-case basis. 

Note: Although typical exemption status 

under the various pay bands is shown in the 

above table, actual FLSA exemption 

determinations are made on a case-by-case 

basis. 

4. Classification Authority 

The ARDEC Director will have 

delegated classification authority and 

may in turn, re-delegate this authority to 

appropriate levels. Position descriptions 

will be developed to assist managers in 

exercising delegated position 

classification authority. Managers will 

identify the Occupational Family, 

occupational series, functional code, 

specialty work code, pay band level, 

and the appropriate acquisition codes. 

Personnel specialists will provide 

ongoing consultation and guidance to 

managers and supervisors throughout 

the classification process. These 

decisions will be documented on the 

position description. 

5. Classification Appeals 

Classification appeals under this 

demonstration project will be processed 

using the following procedures: An 

employee may appeal the determination 

of Occupational Family, occupational 

series, position title, and pay band of 

his/her position at any time. An 

employee must formally raise the area of 

concern to supervisors in the immediate 

chain of command, either verbally or in 

writing. If the employee is not satisfied 

with the supervisory response, he/she 

may then appeal to the DoD appellate 

level. Appeal decisions rendered by 

DoD will be final and binding on all 

administrative, certifying, payroll, 

disbursing, and accounting officials of 

the Government. Classification appeals 

are not accepted on positions which 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3754 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

exceed the equivalent of a GS–15 level. 

Time periods for cases processed under 

5 CFR part 511 apply. 

An employee may not appeal the 

accuracy of the position description, the 

demonstration project classification 

criteria, or the pay-setting criteria; the 

assignment of occupational series to an 

Occupational Family; the propriety of a 

pay schedule; matters grievable under 

an administrative or negotiated 

grievance procedure; or a decision 

reached using an alternative dispute 

resolution procedure. 

The evaluations of classification 

appeals under this demonstration 

project are based upon the 

demonstration project classification 

criteria. Case files will be forwarded for 

adjudication through the servicing 

Civilian Personnel Advisory Center 

(CPAC) and will include copies of 

appropriate demonstration project 

criteria. 

C. Contribution-Based Compensation 

System 

1. Overview 

The purpose of the ContributionBased Compensation System (CBCS) is 

to provide an effective, efficient, and 

flexible method for assessing, 

compensating, and managing the 

ARDEC workforce. CBCS is essential for 

the development and continued growth 

of the high quality, extremely 

productive and innovative workforce 

needed to meet mission requirements. 

The CBCS allows for greater employee 

involvement in the assessment process, 

fosters increased communication 

between supervisor and employee, 

promotes a clear accountability of 

performance, facilitates employee career 

progression, and provides an 

understandable and rational basis for 

base pay changes by linking pay, 

performance, and contribution. The 

CBCS process described herein applies 

to all Occupational Families and pay 

band levels except Pay Band VI of the 

E&S Occupational Family. The 

assessment process for E&S Pay Band VI 

positions will be based on the final 

outcome of the DoD evaluation and 

documented in ARDEC Internal 

Operating Instructions. 

CBCS is an assessment system that 

measures the employee’s level of 

contribution to the organization’s 

mission and how well the employee 

performed. Contribution is simply 

defined as the measure of the 

demonstrated value of employee actions 

in terms of accomplishing or advancing 

the organizational objectives and 

mission impact. CBCS promotes base 

pay adjustment decisions made on the 

basis of an individual’s overall annual 

contributions and current base pay in 

relation to other employees’ 

contributions and their level of 

compensation in the pay pool. The 

measurement of overall contribution is 

determined through a rating process 

which determines the Overall 

Contribution Score (OCS). OCS is a key 

component to the CBCS assessment 

system in that it: 

(1) Provides a consistent scoring scale 

linked to base pay even as salaries 

increase in accordance with GPI 

increases. 

(2) Provides a rating scale that enables 

direct comparison of the level and 

quality of employee contributions to the 

current base pay of that employee. 

To accomplish (2) above, the 

employee’s current base pay is 

converted to an Expected OCS (EOCS). 

The other OCS score, Assessed OCS 

(AOCS) is the measurement of the 

employee’s contributions in the 

appraisal process. AOCS is the result of 

measuring contribution and 

performance by using the pay band level 

descriptors for a set of contribution 

factors and discriminators each of 

which is relevant to mission success of 

the organization. The comparison of 

EOCS and AOCS determines if the 

employee is appropriately compensated. 

The same factor level descriptors used 

for classification will also be used for 

the annual CBCS employee assessments 

(see Appendix C). 

2. Contribution Factors 

The following six (6) factors will be 

used for evaluating the yearly 

contribution of the ARDEC personnel in 

all three Occupational Families: 

(1) Problem Solving 

(2) Teamwork/Cooperation 

(3) Customer Relations 

(4) Leadership/Supervision 

(5) Communication 

(6) Resource Management 

Each factor has multiple levels of 

increasing contribution corresponding 

to the pay band levels. Each factor 

contains descriptors for each respective 

pay band level within the relevant 

Occupational Family. 

The appropriate Occupational Family 

pay band level factor descriptors will be 

used by the rating official to determine 

the employee’s actual contribution 

score. Employees can score within, 

above, or below their pay band level. 

For example, a pay band level II 

employee could score in the pay band 

level I, II, III, or IV range. 

3. Pay Pools 

The ARDEC employees will be placed 

into pay pools that are defined for the 

purpose of determining performance 

payouts under the CBCS. Pay pools will 

be established and operated in 

accordance with the guidelines 

provided in the following paragraphs. 

These guidelines will be followed 

noting the following exception. The 

ARDEC Director may deviate from the 

guidelines provided there is a 

compelling need. The rationale must be 

documented in writing. 

The ARDEC Director will establish 

pay pools. Typically, pay pools will 

have between 35 and 300 employees. A 

pay pool should be large enough to 

encompass a reasonable distribution of 

ratings but not so large as to 

compromise rating consistency. Neither 

the pay pool manager nor supervisors 

within a pay pool will recommend or 

set their own individual pay. Decisions 

regarding the amount of the 

contribution payout are based on the 

established formal payout calculations. 

Funds within a pay pool available for 

contribution payouts are divided into 

two components, base pay and bonus. 

These funds will be determined based 

on historical data. The base pay fund 

will be set at no less than two percent 

of total base pay of employees eligible 

for compensation adjustment in CBCS. 

The bonus fund will be set at no less 

than one percent of total base pay. The 

ARDEC PMB will annually review the 

pay pool funding and recommend 

adjustments to the ARDEC Director to 

ensure cost discipline over the life of 

the demonstration project. CBCS 

payouts can be in the form of increases 

to base pay and/or bonuses that are not 

added to base pay but rather are given 

as a lump-sum payment. Other awards 

such as special acts, time-off awards, 

etc., will be managed separately from 

the CBCS payouts. 

4. Annual Appraisal Cycle and Rating 

Process 

The annual appraisal cycle normally 

begins on October 1 and ends on 

September 30 of the following year. The 

minimum rating period will be 90 days. 

At the beginning of the annual appraisal 

period, the pay band level descriptors 

for each factor will be provided to 

employees so that they know the basis 

on which their performance will be 

assessed. At the discretion of the pay 

pool manager, weights will be applied 

to the factors. If weighting is used, the 

same weighting will be applied to all 

similar positions within an 

Occupational Family in a pay pool. 

Also, if weighting is used, the minimum 

weighting will be 10 percent and the 

sum of all weights must equal 100 

percent. Employees will be informed of 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3755 

the weights at the beginning of the 

rating cycle. 

Each supervisor will discuss work 

assignment, performance and conduct 

standards, and provide clear objectives 

to their employees. Typically, the rating 

official is the first-level supervisor. If 

the current first-level supervisor has 

been in place for less than 90 days 

during the rating cycle, the second-level 

supervisor serves as the initial rating 

official. If the second-level supervisor is 

in place for less than 90 days during the 

rating cycle, the next higher level 

supervisor in the employee’s rating 

chain conducts the assessment. 

Employees and supervisors alike are 

expected to actively participate in ongoing formal and informal performance 

discussions regarding expectations. The 

timing of these discussions will vary 

based on the nature of work performed, 

but will occur at least at the mid-point 

and end of the rating period. At least 

one review, normally the mid-point 

review, will be documented as a 

progress review. Exceptions may be 

established by the PMB and approved 

by the ARDEC Director based on 

employees that will be in the Lab Demo 

for less than 180 days at the end of the 

rating cycle. More frequent, task 

specific, discussions may be appropriate 

in some organizations. 

The employee will provide a list of 

his/her accomplishments to the 

supervisor at both the mid-point and 

end of the rating period. An employee 

may elect to provide self-ratings on the 

contribution factors and/or solicit input 

from team members, customers, peers, 

supervisors in other units, subordinates, 

and other sources which will assist the 

supervisor in fully evaluating 

contributions. At the end of the annual 

appraisal period, the immediate 

supervisor (rating official), from 

employees’ inputs and his/her own 

knowledge, identifies for each employee 

the appropriate contribution level for 

each factor, and recommends the AOCS. 

To determine the AOCS, numerical 

values are assigned based on the 

contribution levels of individuals, using 

the ranges shown in Table 3. The AOCS 

is calculated by averaging the numerical 

values (as weighted if applicable) 

assigned for each of the six contribution 

factors. (All AOCS’s will be rounded to 

the nearest tenth of a point. If the 

decimal is .05 or higher, the AOCS will 

be rounded up.) The rating official in 

conjunction with the second-level 

supervisor reviews the AOCS for all 

employees, correcting any 

inconsistencies identified and making 

the appropriate adjustments in the 

factor ratings. 

TABLE 3—CONTRIBUTION SCORE RANGES BY OCCUPATIONAL FAMILY

Pay 

Band 

Levels 

Engineering and 

Science 

Business and Technical General Support 

Point Range Point Range Point Range 

VI ..................................................................................... TBD — — 

Very High ................................................................... 101–115 101–115 — 

High ............................................................................ 97–100 97–100 — 

V Med ............................................................................ 91–96 91–96 — 

Low ............................................................................. 87–90 87–90 — 

High ............................................................................ 91–95 91–95 — 

IV Med ............................................................................ 84–90 84–90 — 

Low ............................................................................. 79–83 79–83 — 

Very High ................................................................... — — 60–64 

High ............................................................................ 81–86 81–86 53–59 

III Med ............................................................................ 68–80 68–80 47–52 

Low ............................................................................. 62–67 62–67 43–46 

High ............................................................................ 62–68 62–68 46–54 

Med High .................................................................... 51–61 51–61 — 

II Med ............................................................................ 41–50 41–50 30–45 

Med Low ..................................................................... 30–40 30–40 — 

Low ............................................................................. 22–29 22–29 22–29 

High ............................................................................ 24–30 24–30 24–30 

I Med ............................................................................ 6–23 6–23 6–23 

Low ............................................................................. 0–5 0–5 0–5 

The pay pool panel conducts a final 

review of the AOCS for each employee 

in the pay pool. The pay pool panel has 

the authority to make AOCS 

adjustments, after discussion with the 

initial rating officials, to ensure equity 

and consistency. Final approval of 

AOCS rests with the pay pool manager, 

the individual within the organization 

responsible for managing the CBCS 

process. The AOCS, as approved by the 

pay pool manager, becomes the rating of 

record. Rating officials will 

communicate the factor scores and 

AOCS to each employee and discuss the 

results. 

If on the last day of the appraisal 

cycle the employee has served under 

CBCS for less than 90 days, the first 

rating will be provided at the end of the 

next annual rating cycle. The first CBCS 

appraisal must be rendered within 18 

months after entering the demonstration 

project. 

When an employee cannot be 

evaluated readily by the normal CBCS 

appraisal process due to special 

circumstances that take the individual 

away from normal duties or duty station 

(e.g., long-term full-time training, active 

military duty, extended sick leave, leave 

without pay, etc.), the rating official will 

document the special circumstances on 

the appraisal form. The rating official 

will then determine which of the 

following options to use: 

a. Re-certify the employee’s last 

contribution appraisal; or 

b. Presume the employee is 

contributing consistently at his/her pay 

level. 

5. Linking OCS to Compensation 

Adjustment 

a. The Normal Pay Range (NPR) 

The CBCS integrated pay schedule 

provides a direct link between 

contribution level and base pay. This is 

shown by the graph in Figure 1. The 

horizontal axis spans from 0 to the 

maximum OCS of 100 for positions in 

pay band levels I through V. Impact of 

Band VI will be determined after 

receiving DoD guidance on Band VI 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3756 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

positions. The vertical axis spans from 

zero dollars to the dollar equivalent of 

the highest positions covered by CBCS. 

This encompasses the full base pay 

range (excluding locality pay and 

staffing supplements) under this 

demonstration for the given calendar 

year (note: Figure 1 currently depicts 

Calendar Year (CY) 10). Each year the 

rails for the NPR are adjusted based on 

the GS general pay increase under 

5 U.S.C. 5303. The area between the 

upper and lower rails is considered the 

NPR. This pay range represents a base 

pay range of plus or minus eight percent 

from the Standard Pay Line (SPL). The 

SPL is a mapping of the GS base pay 

scale to OCS values (see formula below) 

that shows the expected level of 

contributions (EOCS) from an employee 

at a specific base pay rate. The SPL and 

NPR provide the means to link base pay 

and contribution using a scale that does 

not change even as a base pay range 

changes with GPI increases. This scale 

is not a linear scale but rather adopts 

and reflects the provision that the 

former GS basic pay increases (e.g., GPI, 

step increases) are percentage increases. 

Thus, the scale reflects that each point 

increase in OCS reflects a fixed percent 

increase in base pay. For example, an 

OCS of 61 reflects an approximate two 

percent base pay difference over an OCS 

of 60 and an OCS of 87 reflects an 

approximate two percent base pay 

difference over an OCS of 86. The SPL 

and NPR are established using the 

following parameters: 

(1) The lowest possible score is an 

OCS of 0, which equates to the lowest 

base pay under this demonstration 

project, GS–1, step 1, 

(2) The OCS of 100 equates to the base 

pay of GS–15, step 10. 

The SPL is calculated as: 

Standard Pay Line (SPL) = (GS–1, 

Step 1) * (1.020043) OCS

The factor 1.020043 is called the SPL 

factor and reflects the percent increase 

of salary corresponding to a one point 

increase in OCS: 

SPL Factor = (GS–15, Step 10)/(GS–1, 

Step 1)(0.01)

The SPL Factor will remain the same 

value (1.020043) for as long as GPI 

increases are applied as the same 

percentage increase to GS–1, Step 1, to 

GS–15, Step 10. 

The upper rail is calculated as: Upper 

Rail = SPL * 1.08 

The lower rail is calculated as: Lower 

Rail = SPL * 0.92 

The upper and lower rails encompass 

an area of +/¥ 8.0 percent in terms of 

base pay which correlates to 

approximately +/¥ 4.0 OCS points. 

The EOCS is the intersection of the 

employee’s current base pay and the 

SPL. In the instance of an employee on 

retained pay, the EOCS is determined by 

using the maximum base pay of the 

employee’s assigned pay band in lieu of 

their current base pay. 

The NPR is the same for all the 

Occupational Families. What varies 

among the Occupational Families are 

the beginnings and endings of the pay 

band levels. The minimum and 

maximum numerical OCS values and 

associated base pay for each pay band 

level by Occupational Family are 

provided in Table 4. These minimum 

and maximum breakpoints represent the 

lowest and highest base pay for the 

bands; and the minimum and maximum 

base pay possible for each pay band 

level. Locality pay or staffing 

supplements are not included in the 

NPR but are added to base pay as 

appropriate. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUSEN20JA11.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3757 

TABLE 4—OCS AND PAY BAND BASE PAY RANGES

Occupational 

family 

$ (CY10 OCS salaries) 

I II III IV V VI1

E&S ................ $17,803–$32,288 $27,548–$68,634 $60,930–$98,100 $85,377–$117,283 $100,066–$129,517 

0–30 22–68 62–86 79–95 87–100 

Business & 

Technical .... $17,803–$32,288 $27,548–$68,634 $60,930–$98,100 $85,377–$117,283 $100,066–$129,517 

0–30 22–68 62–86 79–95 87–100 

General Support ............. $17,803–$32,288 $27,548–$51,986 $41,791–$57,409 

0–30 22–54 43–59 

1Band VI pay and OCS range will be determined based on DoD guidance. 

b. OCS-Based Compensation 

Adjustment Guidelines 

After the pay pool manager approves 

the OCS for all employees in the pay 

pool, the current base pay versus AOCS 

is plotted for all employees on a chart 

similar to Figure 2. This plot relates 

contribution to base pay, and identifies 

the placement of each employee into 

one of three regions: Region A—Abovethe-NPR, Region C—Within-the-NPR, or 

Region B—Below-the-NPR. When an 

employee is placed in the Region A— 

Above-the-NPR, the employee is 

considered to be overcompensated. 

When an employee is placed in the 

Region B—Below-the-NPR the employee 

is considered to be undercompensated 

and when an employee is placed in the 

Region C—Within-the-NPR, the 

employee is considered to be adequately 

compensated. 

c. The following delineates 

compensation adjustment guidelines for 

employees in each of the three regions: 

(1) All employees are entitled to the 

full locality pay or a staffing 

supplement, as appropriate (subject to 

overall salary pay limitations). 

(2) The employees whose base pay 

falls within the NPR (Region C) must 

receive the full GPI, may receive a 

Contribution Base Pay Increase of up to 

6 percent, and may receive a 

Contribution Bonus. The Contribution 

Base Pay Increase is included as a 

permanent increase in base pay, but the 

Contribution Bonus is a onetime lump 

sum payment that does not affect base 

pay. 

(3) The employees whose base pay 

falls above the NPR (Region A) could be 

denied part or all of the GPI and will 

receive no Contribution Base Pay 

Increase or Contribution Bonus. The 

intent of the demonstration project is to 

allow managers to retain the ability to 

determine how much, if any, of the GPI 

an Overcompensated (Region A) 

employee shall receive, on a case-bycase basis. 

(4) The employees whose base pay 

falls below the NPR (Region B) must 

receive the full GPI, may receive up to 

a 20 percent Contribution Base Pay 

Increase (higher amounts require the 

approval of the ARDEC Director), and 

may also receive a Contribution Bonus. 

(5) The employees on retained pay in 

the demonstration project will receive 

base pay adjustments in accordance 

with 5 U.S.C. 5363 and 5 CFR Part 536. 

An employee receiving retained pay is 

not eligible for a Contribution Base Pay 

Increase, but may receive a Contribution 

Bonus. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUSEN20JA11.003</GPH>
3758 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

(6) Table 5 illustrates the additional 

pay adjustments possible for the three 

groupings of employees. 

TABLE 5—COMPENSATION ELIGIBILITY CHART

Category General pay increase Contribution base pay increase Contribution bonus Locality pay/staffing supplement 1

—Above the NPR .......... Could be reduced or denied.NO ...................................... NO ...................................... YES 

Within the NPR— .......... YES .................................... YES2—Up to 6 percent ..... YES5 .................................. YES 

—Below the NPR .......... YES .................................... YES3 4—Up to 20 percent YES5 .................................. YES 

1Base pay plus locality pay/staffing supplement may not exceed Executive Level IV, except for Band VI. 

2 May not exceed upper rail of NPR for employee’s AOCS or maximum base pay for current pay band level. 

3Over 20 percent requires ARDEC Director’s approval. 

4 May not exceed 6 percent above the lower rail or the maximum base pay for current pay band level. 

5Pay pool manager approves up to $10,000. Amounts exceeding $10,000 require ARDEC Director’s approval. 

(7) In general, those employees whose 

base pay falls below the NPR should 

expect to receive greater percentage base 

pay increases than those whose base pay 

is above the NPR. Over time, people will 

migrate closer to the normal pay range 

and base pay appropriate for their level 

of contribution. 

(8) Employees whose AOCS would 

result in awarding a Contribution Base 

Pay Increase such that the base pay 

exceeds the maximum base pay for their 

current pay band level may receive a 

Contribution Bonus equaling the 

difference. 

6. Accelerated Compensation for 

Developmental Positions (ACDP) 

ACDP provides for an increase to base 

pay, bonus, or a combination of these to 

employees participating in training 

programs or in other developmental 

capacities as determined by the ARDEC 

policy. ACDP recognizes growth and 

development in the acquisition of jobrelated competencies combined with 

successful contribution. In order to 

receive an ACDP, the employee must be 

in a pay and duty status and have been 

on an approved performance plan (may 

be from any system) for 90 days. Most 

ACDP increases will occur yearly, 

comparable to the GS intern career 

progression. However, when warranted 

(e.g., high turnover positions, hard-tofill positions, exceptional performance 

by the employee), an ACDP increase 

may occur anytime during the year. 

Employees under an ACDP will follow 

the standard CBCS rating cycle. The 

employee is only entitled to the bonus 

component as a result of CBCS rating. 

7. Extraordinary Achievement 

Recognition 

A pay pool manager may request 

approval from the ARDEC Director for 

use of an Extraordinary Achievement 

Recognition. Such recognition grants a 

base pay increase and/or bonus to an 

employee. The funds available for an 

Extraordinary Achievement Recognition 

are separately funded within budget 

constraints. 

8. Awards 

To provide additional flexibility in 

motivating and rewarding individuals 

and groups, some portion of the award 

budget will be reserved for special acts 

and other categories as they occur. 

Awards may include, but are not limited 

to, special acts, patents, suggestions, onthe-spot, and time-off. The funds 

available to be used for traditional title 

5 U.S.C. awards are separately funded 

within budget constraints. 

While not directly linked to the CBCS, 

this additional flexibility is important to 

encourage outstanding contribution and 

innovation in accomplishing the diverse 

mission of the ARDEC. Additionally, to 

foster and encourage teamwork among 

its employees, organizations may give 

group awards. The delegation of awards 

authority is an internal Army decision 

and will be considered as such. 

9. Adverse Actions 

Except where specifically waived or 

modified in this plan, adverse action 

procedures under 5 CFR part 752 

remain unchanged. 

10. Grievance of Assessed Overall 

Contribution Score 

An employee may grieve the AOCS 

received under the CBCS. Nonbargaining unit employees and 

bargaining unit employees covered by a 

negotiated grievance procedure that 

does not permit grievances over 

performance ratings must file under 

administrative grievance procedures. 

Bargaining unit employees whose 

negotiated grievance procedures cover 

performance rating grievances must file 

under those negotiated procedures. 

Payout amounts resulting from the 

contribution assessment cannot be 

grieved. 

11. Inadequate Employee Performance/ 

Contribution 

Inadequate performance/contribution 

at any time during the appraisal period 

is considered grounds for initiation of a 

reduction-in-pay or removal action. The 

following procedures replace those 

established in 5 U.S.C. 4303 pertaining 

to reductions in grade or removal for 

unacceptable performance except with 

respect to appeals of such actions. 5 

U.S.C. 4303(e) provides the statutory 

authority for appeals of contributionbased actions. As is currently the 

situation for performance-based actions 

taken under 5 U.S.C. 4303, contributionbased actions shall be sustained if the 

decision is supported by substantial 

evidence; and the Merit Systems 

Protection Board shall not have 

mitigation authority with respect to 

such actions. The separate statutory 

authority to take contribution-based 

actions under 5 U.S.C. 75, as modified 

in the waiver section of this notice 

(section IX), remains unchanged by 

these procedures. 

When an employee’s AOCS plots 

above the upper rail of the NPR and the 

employee is considered to be underperforming/contributing, the supervisor 

has two options. The first is to take no 

action but to document this decision in 

a memorandum for the record. A copy 

of this memorandum will be provided to 

the employee and management. The 

second option is to inform the 

employee, in writing, that unless the 

contribution increases to, and is 

sustained at, a higher level, the 

employee may be reduced in pay, pay 

band level, or removed. 

The second option will include a 

Contribution Improvement Plan (CIP). 

The CIP must include standards for 

acceptable contribution, actions 

required of the employee, and time in 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3759 

which they must be accomplished to 

increase and sustain the employee’s 

contribution at an acceptable level. 

When an employee is placed on a CIP, 

the rating official will afford the 

employee a reasonable opportunity (a 

minimum of 60 days) to demonstrate 

acceptable contribution. These 

provisions also apply to an employee 

whose contribution deteriorates during 

the year. 

Employees who are on a CIP at the 

time pay determinations are made do 

not receive performance payouts or the 

annual GPI. Employees who are on a 

CIP will not receive any portion of the 

GPI or RIF service credit until such time 

as his/her performance improves to the 

acceptable level and remains acceptable 

for at least 90 days. When the employee 

has performed acceptably for at least 90 

days, the GPI and RIF service credit will 

be reinstated at the beginning of the 

next pay period. No retroactive GPI will 

be paid for time lost under a CIP. 

Once an employee has been afforded 

a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate 

acceptable contribution but fails to do 

so, a reduction-in-pay (which may 

include a change to a lower pay band 

level and/or reassignment) or removal 

action may be proposed. If the 

employee’s contribution increases to an 

acceptable level and is again determined 

to deteriorate in any factor within two 

years from the beginning of the 

opportunity period, actions may be 

initiated to effect reduction in pay or 

removal with no additional opportunity 

to improve. If an employee has 

contributed acceptably for two years 

from the beginning of an opportunity 

period, and the employee’s overall 

contribution once again declines to an 

unacceptable level, the employee will 

be afforded an additional opportunity to 

demonstrate acceptable contribution 

before it is determined whether or not 

to propose a reduction in pay or 

removal. 

An employee whose reduction in pay 

or removal is proposed is entitled to a 

30-day advance notice of the proposed 

action that identifies specific instances 

of unacceptable contribution by the 

employee on which the action is based. 

The employee will be afforded a 

reasonable time to answer the notice of 

proposed action orally and/or in 

writing. 

A decision to reduce pay or remove 

an employee for unacceptable 

contribution may be based only on those 

instances of unacceptable contribution 

that occurred during the two-year 

period ending on the date of issuance of 

the proposed action. The employee will 

be issued written notice at or before the 

time the action will be effective. Such 

notice will specify the instances of 

unacceptable contribution by the 

employee on which the action is based 

and will inform the employee of any 

applicable appeal or grievance rights. 

All relevant documentation 

concerning a reduction-in-pay or 

removal that is based on unacceptable 

contribution will be preserved and 

made available for review by the 

affected employee or a designated 

representative. At a minimum, the 

records will consist of a copy of the 

notice of proposed action; the written 

answer of the employee or a summary 

when the employee makes an oral reply; 

and the written notice of decision and 

the reasons thereof, along with any 

supporting material including 

documentation regarding the 

opportunity afforded the employee to 

demonstrate acceptable contribution. 

D. Hiring Authority 

1. Qualifications 

The qualifications required for 

placement into a position in a pay band 

within an Occupational Family will be 

determined using the OPM ‘‘Operating 

Manual for Qualification Standards for 

GS Positions.’’ Since the pay bands are 

anchored to the GS grade levels, the 

minimum qualification requirements for 

a position will be those corresponding 

to the lowest GS grade incorporated into 

that pay band. For example, for a 

position in the E&S Occupational 

Family, Pay Band II individuals must 

meet the basic requirements for a GS– 

5 as specified in the OPM ‘‘Qualification 

Standard for Professional and Scientific 

Positions.’’ 

Selective factors may be established 

for a position in accordance with the 

OPM ‘‘Operating Manual for 

Qualification Standards for GS 

Positions’’ when determined to be 

critical to successful job performance. 

These factors will become part of the 

minimum requirements for the position; 

and applicants must meet them in order 

to be eligible. If used, selective factors 

will be stated as part of the qualification 

requirements in vacancy 

announcements and recruiting bulletins. 

2. Delegated Examining 

Competitive service positions will be 

filled through Merit Staffing, Direct Hire 

Authority, or Delegated Examining. 

Where delegated to the laboratory level, 

hiring authority will be exercised in 

accordance with the requirements of the 

delegation of authority. The Rule of 

Three will be eliminated. When there 

are no more than fifteen qualified 

applicants and no preference eligibles, 

all eligible applicants are immediately 

referred to the selecting official without 

rating and ranking. Rating and ranking 

will be required only when the number 

of qualified candidates exceeds fifteen 

or there is a mix of preference and nonpreference applicants. Statutes and 

regulations covering veterans’ 

preference will be observed in the 

selection process and when rating and 

ranking are required. 

3. Direct Hire Authority for Candidates 

With Advanced Degrees for Scientific 

and Engineering Positions 

a. Background: 

The ARDEC has, and is forecasted to 

have, for the foreseeable future an 

urgent need for direct hire authority to 

appoint qualified candidates possessing 

an advanced degree to scientific and 

engineering positions. The market is 

extremely competitive with industry 

and academia for the small supply of 

highly-qualified and security clearable 

candidates with a Masters Degree or 

Ph.D. in science or engineering. There 

are 35,000 scientists and engineers 

employed in the DoD laboratories; 27 

percent hold Masters Degrees, while 10 

percent are in possession of a Ph.D. The 

ARDEC employs over 2,300 scientists 

and engineers; 34 percent holding 

Masters Degrees, while 2.6 percent are 

in possession of a Ph.D. Over the next 

five years, the ARDEC plans to hire 

approximately 500 of the country’s best 

and brightest scientists and engineers 

(S&Es) just to keep pace with attrition. 

This number does not include the 

impact that actions such as Base 

Realignment and Closure may have on 

the attrition of S&Es from the ARDEC. 

Statistics indicate that the available pool 

of advanced degree, security clearable 

candidates is substantially diminished 

by the number of non-U.S. citizens 

granted degrees by U.S. institutions. For 

instance, in 2006, 20 percent of Masters 

Degrees in science and over 35 percent 

of Ph.D.s in science were awarded to 

temporary residents. 

It is expected that this hiring 

authority, together with streamlined 

recruitment processes, will be very 

effective in hiring candidates possessing 

a Masters or Ph.D. and accelerating the 

hiring process. For instance, under a 

similar authority found in the NDAA for 

FY 09, section 1108, Public Law 110– 

417, October 28, 2009, one STRL had 

fifteen Ph.D. selectees in 2009 for the 

sixteen vacancies for which they were 

using this hiring authority. Another 

STRL, using this expedited hiring 

authority in calendar year 2009, made 

thirty firm hiring offers in an average of 

thirteen days from receipt of paper work 

in the Human Resources Office. Of these 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3760 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

thirty selectees, twenty-three possessed 

Ph.D.s. 

b. Definitions: 

(1) Scientific and engineering 

positions are defined as all professional 

positions in scientific and engineering 

occupations (with a positive education 

requirement) utilized by the laboratory. 

(2) An advanced degree is a Master’s 

or higher degree from an accredited 

college or university in a field of 

scientific or engineering study directly 

related to the duties of the position to 

be filled. 

(3) Qualified candidates are defined 

as candidates who: 

(a) Meet the minimum standards for 

the position as published in OPM’s 

operating manual, ‘‘Qualification 

Standards for General Schedule 

Positions,’’ or the laboratory’s 

demonstration project qualification 

standards specific to the position to be 

filled; 

(b) Possess an advanced degree; and 

(c) Meet any selective factors. 

(4) The term ‘‘employee’’ is defined by 

section 2105 of title 5, U.S.C. 

c. Provisions: 

(1) Use of this appointing authority 

must comply with merit system 

principles when recruiting and 

appointing candidates with advanced 

degrees to covered occupations. 

(2) Qualified candidates possessing an 

advanced degree may be appointed 

without regard to the provisions of 

subchapter 1 of chapter 33 of title 5, 

United States Code, other than sections 

3303, 3321, and 3328 of such title. 

(3) The hiring threshold for this 

authority shall be consistent with DoD 

policy and legislative language as 

expressed in any National Defense 

Authorization Act addressing such. 

(4) Positions and candidates must be 

counted on a full-time equivalent basis. 

(5) Science and engineering positions 

that are filled as of the close of the fiscal 

year are those positions encumbered on 

the last day of the fiscal year. 

(6) When completing the personnel 

action, the following will be given as the 

authority for the Career-Conditional, 

Career, Term, Temporary, or special 

demonstration project appointment 

authority: Section 1108, NDAA for FY 

09. 

(7) Evaluation of this hiring authority 

will include information and data on its 

use, such as numerical limitation, hires 

made, how many veterans hired, 

declinations, difficulties encountered, 

and/or recognized efficiencies. 

4. Distinguished Scholastic 

Achievement Appointment 

ARDEC will establish a Distinguished 

Scholastic Achievement Appointment 

using an alternative examining process 

which provides the authority to appoint 

undergraduates and graduates through 

the doctoral level to professional 

positions at the equivalent of GS–7 

through GS–11, and GS–12 positions. At 

the undergraduate level, candidates may 

be appointed to positions at a pay level 

no greater than the equivalent of GS–7, 

step 10, provided that: they meet the 

minimum standards for the position as 

published in OPM’s operating manual, 

‘‘Qualification Standards for General 

Schedule Positions,’’ plus any selective 

factors stated in the vacancy 

announcement; the occupation has a 

positive education requirement; and the 

candidate has a cumulative grade point 

average of 3.5 or better (on a 4.0 scale) 

in those courses in those fields of study 

that are specified in the qualifications 

standards for the occupational series. 

Appointments may also be made at the 

equivalent of GS–9 through GS–12 on 

the basis of graduate education and/or 

experience for those candidates with a 

grade point average of 3.5 or better (on 

a 4.0 scale) for graduate level courses in 

the field of study required for the 

occupation. Veterans’ preference 

procedures will apply when selecting 

candidates under this authority. 

Preference eligibles who meet the above 

criteria will be considered ahead of 

nonpreference eligibles. In making 

selections, to pass over any preference 

eligible(s) to select a nonpreference 

eligible requires approval under current 

pass-over or objection procedures. 

Priority must also be given to displaced 

employees as may be specified in OPM 

and DoD regulations. Distinguished 

Scholastic Achievement Appointments 

will enable ARDEC to respond quickly 

to hiring needs with eminently qualified 

candidates possessing distinguished 

scholastic achievements. 

5. Legal Authority 

For actions taken under the auspices 

of this demonstration project, the legal 

authorities, Public Law 103–337, as 

amended, and Public Law 111–84 will 

be used. For all other actions, the nature 

of action codes and legal authority 

codes prescribed by OPM, DoD, or DA 

will continue to be used. 

6. Modified Term Appointments 

The ARDEC conducts a variety of 

projects that range from three to six 

years. The current four-year limitation 

on term appointments for competitive 

service employees often results in the 

termination of these employees prior to 

completion of projects they were hired 

to support. This disrupts the research 

and development process and affects the 

organization’s ability to accomplish the 

mission and serve its customers. 

The ARDEC will continue to have 

career and career-conditional 

appointments and temporary 

appointments not-to-exceed one year. 

These appointments will use existing 

authorities and entitlements. Under the 

demonstration project, ARDEC will have 

the added authority to hire individuals 

under a modified term appointment. 

These appointments will be used to fill 

positions for a period of more than one 

year, but not more than a total of five 

years when the need for an employee’s 

services is not permanent. The modified 

term appointments differ from term 

employment as described in 5 CFR part 

316 in that they may be made for a 

period not to exceed five, rather than 

four years. The ARDEC Director is 

authorized to extend a modified term 

appointment one additional year. 

Employees hired under the modified 

term appointment authority are in a 

non-permanent status, but may be 

eligible for non-competitive conversion 

to career-conditional or career 

appointments. To be converted, the 

employee must: 

(1) Have been selected for the term 

position under competitive procedures, 

with the announcement specifically 

stating that the individual(s) selected for 

the term position may be eligible for 

conversion to a career-conditional or 

career appointment at a later date; 

(2) have served two years of 

continuous service in the term position; 

and 

(3) be performing at an acceptable 

level of performance. 

Employees serving under term 

appointments at the time of conversion 

to the demonstration project will be 

converted to the new modified term 

appointments provided they were hired 

for their current positions under 

competitive procedures. These 

employees will be eligible for 

conversion to career-conditional or 

career appointments if they: 

(1) Have served two years of 

continuous service in the term position; 

(2) are selected under merit 

promotion procedures for the 

permanent position; and 

(3) have not been placed on a 

Contribution Improvement Period (CIP). 

Time served in term positions prior to 

conversion to the modified term 

appointment is creditable, provided the 

service was continuous. 

7. Initial Probationary Period 

The probationary period will not be 

less than one year and will not exceed 

three years for all newly hired 

employees as defined in 5 CFR part 315. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3761 

The specific probationary period will be 

defined and controlled by the ARDEC 

Director. The purpose of the 

probationary period is to allow 

supervisors an adequate period of time 

to fully evaluate an employee’s ability to 

complete a cycle of work and to fully 

assess an employee’s contribution and 

conduct. All other features of the 

current probationary period are retained 

including the potential to remove an 

employee without providing the full 

substantive and procedural rights 

afforded a non-probationary employee. 

Any employee fulfilling this 

probationary period prior to the 

implementation date will not be 

affected. 

8. Termination of Initial Probationary 

Period Employees 

Probationary employees may be 

terminated when they fail to 

demonstrate proper conduct, technical 

competency, and/or acceptable 

performance for continued employment 

and for conditions arising before 

employment. When a supervisor 

decides to terminate an employee 

during the probationary period because 

his/her work performance or conduct is 

unacceptable, the supervisor shall 

terminate the employee’s services by 

written notification subject to higher 

level management approval. This 

notification shall state the reason(s) for 

termination and the effective date of the 

action. The information in the notice 

shall, at a minimum, consist of the 

supervisor’s conclusions as to the 

inadequacies of the employee’s 

performance or conduct or those 

conditions arising before employment 

that support the termination. 

9. Supervisory and Managerial 

Probationary Periods 

Supervisory and managerial 

probationary periods will be made 

consistent with 5 CFR part 315. Current 

government employees, selected for an 

initial appointment to a supervisory or 

managerial position in ARDEC are 

required to successfully complete a twoyear probationary period. If the 

employee is transferred to a different 

supervisory position, he or she does not 

have to repeat the probationary period, 

but may continue the duration of the 

probationary period if the time was not 

completed in the previous supervisory 

position. If, during this probationary 

period, the decision is made to return 

the employee to a non-supervisory/ 

managerial position for reasons related 

to supervisory/managerial performance, 

the employee will be returned to a 

comparable position of no lower pay 

than the position from which promoted 

or reassigned. When a supervisor 

determines to reassign a probationary 

supervisor to a non-supervisory position 

during the probationary period because 

of his/her work performance or conduct 

is unacceptable, the probationary 

employee’s supervisor will provide 

written notification subject to higher 

level management approval. 

10. Volunteer Emeritus Corps 

Under the demonstration project, the 

ARDEC Director will have the authority 

to offer retired or separated employees 

voluntary positions. The ARDEC 

Director may re-delegate this authority. 

Volunteer Emeritus Corps assignments 

are not considered employment by the 

Federal government (except for 

purposes of injury compensation). Thus, 

such assignments do not affect an 

employee’s entitlement to buyouts or 

severance payments based on an earlier 

separation from Federal service. The 

volunteer’s Federal retirement pay 

(whether military or civilian) is not 

affected while serving in a voluntary 

capacity. Retired or separated Federal 

employees may accept an emeritus 

position without a break or mandatory 

waiting period. 

The Volunteer Emeritus Corps will 

ensure continued quality services while 

reducing the overall salary line by 

allowing higher paid employees to 

accept retirement incentives with the 

opportunity to retain a presence in the 

ARDEC community. The program will 

be beneficial during manpower 

reductions, as employees accept 

retirement and return to provide a 

continuing source of corporate 

knowledge and valuable on-the-job 

training or mentoring to less 

experienced employees. 

To be accepted into the Volunteer 

Emeritus Corps, a volunteer must be 

recommended by an ARDEC manager to 

the Director or delegated authority. Not 

everyone who applies is entitled to an 

emeritus position. The responsible 

official will document acceptance or 

rejection of the applicant. For 

acceptance, documentation must be 

retained throughout the assignment. For 

rejection, documentation will be 

maintained for two years. 

Volunteer Emeritus Corps volunteers 

will not be permitted to monitor 

contracts on behalf of the Government 

or to participate on any contracts or 

solicitations where a conflict of interest 

exists. The volunteers may be required 

to submit a financial disclosure form 

annually. The same rules that currently 

apply to source selection members will 

apply to volunteers. 

An agreement will be established 

among the volunteer, the responsible 

official, and the CPAC. The agreement 

must be finalized before the assumption 

of duties and shall include the 

following: 

(a) Statement that the voluntary 

assignment does not constitute an 

appointment in the Civil Service, is 

without compensation, and the 

volunteer waives any claims against the 

Government based on the voluntary 

assignment; 

(b) statement that the volunteer will 

be considered a Federal employee only 

for the purpose of injury compensation; 

(c) volunteer’s work schedule; 

(d) length of agreement (defined by 

length of project or time defined by 

weeks, months, or years); 

(e) support provided by the 

organization (travel, administrative 

support, office space, and supplies); 

(f) statement of duties; 

(g) statement providing that no 

additional time will be added to a 

volunteer’s service credit for such 

purposes as retirement, severance pay, 

and leave as a result of being a 

volunteer; 

(h) provision allowing either party to 

void the agreement with two working 

days written notice; 

(i) level of security access required by 

the volunteer (any security clearance 

required by the position will be 

managed by the employing 

organization); 

(j) provision that any publication(s) 

resulting from his/her work will be 

submitted to the ARDEC Director for 

review and approval; 

(k) statement that he/she accepts 

accountability for loss or damage to 

Government property occasioned by 

his/her negligence or willful action; 

(l) statement that his/her activities on 

the premises will conform to the 

regulations and requirements of the 

organization; 

(m) statement that he/she will not 

release any sensitive or proprietary 

information without the written 

approval of the employing organization 

and further agrees to execute additional 

non-disclosure agreements as 

appropriate, if required, by the nature of 

the anticipated services; 

(n) statement that he/she agrees to 

disclose any inventions made in the 

course of work performed at ARDEC. 

The ARDEC Director has the option to 

obtain title to any such invention on 

behalf of the U.S. Government. Should 

the ARDEC Director elect not to take 

title, the ARDEC, shall at a minimum, 

retain a non-exclusive, irrevocable, 

paid-up, royalty-free license to practice 

or have practiced the invention 

worldwide on behalf of the U.S. 

Government; and 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3762 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

(o) statement that he/she agrees to 

comply with designated mandatory 

training. 

Exceptions to the provisions in this 

procedure may be granted by the 

ARDEC Director on a case-by-case basis. 

E. Internal Placement 

1. Promotion 

A promotion is the movement of an 

employee to a higher pay band in the 

same Occupational Family or to another 

pay band in a different Occupational 

Family, wherein the band in the new 

Occupational Family has a higher 

maximum base pay than the band from 

which the employee is moving. The 

move from one band to another must 

result in an increase in the employee’s 

base pay to be considered a promotion 

unless the employee is on retained pay. 

Positions with known promotion 

potential to a higher band within an 

Occupational Family career path will be 

identified when they are filled. 

Movement from one Occupational 

Family to another will depend upon 

individual competencies, qualifications, 

and the needs of the organization. 

Supervisors may consider promoting 

employees at any time, since 

promotions are not tied to the CBCS. 

Progression within a pay band is based 

upon contribution base pay increases; as 

such, these actions are not considered 

promotions and are not subject to the 

provisions of this section. Except as 

specified in III.E.6, promotions will be 

processed under competitive procedures 

in accordance with Merit System 

Principles and requirements of the local 

merit promotion plan. 

To be promoted competitively or noncompetitively from one band to the 

next, an employee must meet the 

minimum qualifications for the job and 

have an acceptable level of performance. 

If an employee does not have a current 

performance rating, the employee will 

be treated the same as an employee with 

an acceptable rating as long as there is 

no documented evidence of 

unacceptable performance. 

2. Reassignment 

A reassignment is the movement of an 

employee from one position to a 

different position within the same 

Occupational Family and pay band or to 

another Occupational Family and pay 

band wherein the pay band in the new 

family has the same maximum base pay. 

The employee must meet the 

qualifications requirements for the 

Occupational Family and pay band. 

3. Demotion or Placement in a Lower 

Pay Band 

A demotion is a placement of an 

employee into a lower pay band within 

the same Occupational Family or 

placement into a pay band in a different 

Occupational Family with a lower 

maximum base pay. Demotions may be 

for cause (performance or conduct) or 

for reasons other than cause (e.g., 

erosion of duties, reclassification of 

duties to a lower pay band, application 

under competitive announcements, at 

the employee’s request, or placement 

actions resulting from RIF procedures). 

4. Simplified Assignment Process 

Today’s environment of downsizing 

and workforce fluctuations mandates 

that the organization have maximum 

flexibility to assign duties and 

responsibilities to individuals. Pay 

banding can be used to address this 

need, as it enables the organization to 

have maximum flexibility to assign an 

employee with either no change or an 

increase in base pay within broad 

descriptions consistent with the needs 

of the organization and the individual’s 

qualifications and level. Subsequent 

assignments to projects, tasks, or 

functions anywhere within the 

organization requiring the same level, 

area of expertise, and qualifications 

would not constitute an assignment 

outside the scope or coverage of the 

current position description. For 

instance, a technical expert could be 

assigned to any project, task, or function 

requiring similar technical expertise. 

Likewise, a manager could be assigned 

to manage any similar function or 

organization consistent with that 

individual’s qualifications. This 

flexibility allows broader latitude in 

assignments and further streamlines the 

administrative process and system 

while providing management the option 

of granting additional base pay in 

recognition of more complex work or 

broader scope of responsibility. 

5. Detail Assignment 

Under the demonstration project, the 

ARDEC’s approving manager would 

have the authority: 

(1) To effect details up to one year to 

demonstration project positions without 

the current 120-day renewal 

requirement; and 

(2) To effect details to a higher level 

position in the demonstration project up 

to one year within a 24-month period 

without competition. 

Detail assignments beyond one-year 

require the approval of the ARDEC 

Director, and are not subject to the 120- 

day renewal requirement. 

6. Expanded Temporary Promotions 

Current regulations require that 

temporary promotions for more than 

120 days to a higher level position than 

previously held must be made 

competitively. Under the demonstration 

project, the ARDEC would be able to 

effect temporary promotions of not more 

than one year within a 24-month period 

without competition to positions within 

the demonstration project. 

7. Exceptions to Competitive Procedures 

The following actions are excepted 

from competitive procedures: 

(a) Re-promotion to a position which 

is in the same pay band or GS 

equivalent and Occupational Family as 

the employee previously held on a 

permanent basis within the competitive 

service. 

(b) Promotion, reassignment, 

demotion, transfer, or reinstatement to a 

position having promotion potential no 

greater than the potential of a position 

an employee currently holds or 

previously held on a permanent basis in 

the competitive service. 

(c) A position change permitted by 

reduction-in-force procedures. 

(d) Promotion without current 

competition when the employee was 

appointed through competitive 

procedures to a position with a 

documented career ladder. 

(e) A temporary promotion or detail to 

a position in a higher pay band of one 

year or less in a 24-month period. 

(f) A promotion due to the 

reclassification of positions based on 

accretion (addition) of duties. 

(g) A promotion resulting from the 

correction of an initial classification 

error or the issuance of a new 

classification standard. 

(h) Consideration of a candidate who 

did not receive proper consideration in 

a competitive promotion action. 

(i) Impact of person in the job and 

Factor IV process (application of the 

Research Grade Evaluation Guide, 

Equipment Development Grade 

Evaluation Guide, Part III, or similar 

guides) promotions. 

F. Pay Administration 

1. General 

Pay administration policies will be 

established by the PMB. These policies 

will be exempt from Army Regulations 

or Higher Headquarter pay fixing 

policies but will conform to basic 

governmental pay fixing policy. 

Employees whose performance is 

acceptable and not on pay retention will 

receive the full annual general pay 

increase and the full locality pay, with 

the exception of those employees’ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3763 

whose rating is as described in 

paragraph III.C.5.c.(3). The ARDEC may 

make full use of recruitment, retention, 

and relocation payments as provided for 

by OPM under 5 U.S.C. and 5 CFR pay 

flexibilities except as waived by this 

FRN. 

2. Pay and Compensation Ceilings 

An employee’s total monetary 

compensation paid in a calendar year 

may not exceed the rate of pay for Level 

I of the Executive Schedule consistent 

with 5 CFR 530.201. In addition, each 

pay band will have its own base pay 

ceiling. Base pay rates for the various 

pay bands were established to 

approximately cover the pay ranges for 

the GS grade equivalents. Other than 

where retained rate applies, base pay 

will be limited to the maximum base 

pay rate for each pay band. (See Table 

4) 

3. Pay Setting for Appointment 

Upon initial appointment, the 

individual’s pay may be set at the 

lowest base pay in the pay band or 

anywhere within the band level 

consistent with the special 

qualifications of the individual and the 

unique requirements of the position. 

These special qualifications may be in 

the form of education, training, 

experience, or any combination thereof 

that is pertinent to the position in which 

the employee is being placed. Guidance 

on pay setting for new hires will be 

established by the PMB. 

4. Highest Previous Rate 

Highest Previous Rate (HPR) will be 

considered in placement actions 

authorized under rules similar to the 

HPR rules in 5 CFR 531.221. Use of HPR 

will be at the supervisor’s discretion; 

but if used, HPR is subject to policies 

established by the PMB. 

5. Pay Setting for Promotion 

The minimum base pay increase upon 

promotion to a higher pay band will be 

six percent or the amount necessary to 

set the new base pay at the minimum 

base pay rate of the new pay band, 

whichever is greater. The maximum 

amount of a base pay increase for a 

promotion will not exceed $10,000 or 

other such amount as established by the 

PMB. The maximum base pay increase 

for promotion may be exceeded when 

necessary to allow for the minimum 

base pay increase. For employees 

promoted from positions external to Lab 

Demo covered by special rates, the new 

demonstration project base pay rate will 

be calculated to assure an adjusted base 

pay increase of a minimum of six 

percent. 

When a temporary promotion is 

terminated, the employee’s pay 

entitlements will be re-determined 

based on the employee’s position of 

record, with appropriate adjustments to 

reflect pay events during the temporary 

promotion, subject to the specific 

policies and rules established by the 

PMB. In no case may those adjustments 

increase the base pay for the position of 

record beyond the applicable pay band 

maximum base pay rate. 

6. Pay Setting for Reassignment 

A reassignment may be effected 

without a change in base pay. However, 

a base pay increase may be granted 

where a reassignment significantly 

increases the complexity, responsibility, 

and authority or for other compelling 

reasons. Such an increase is subject to 

the specific guidelines established by 

the PMB. 

7. Pay Setting for Demotion or 

Placement in a Lower Pay Band 

Employees demoted for cause 

(performance or conduct) are not 

entitled to pay retention and will 

receive a minimum of a five percent 

decrease in base pay provided that 

decrease does not result in base pay 

falling below the minimum rate for the 

pay band. Employees demoted for 

reasons other than cause (e.g., erosion of 

duties, reclassification of duties to a 

lower pay band, application under 

competitive announcements, at the 

employee’s request, or placement 

actions resulting from RIF procedures) 

may be entitled to pay retention in 

accordance with the provisions of 5 

U.S.C. 5363 and 5 CFR part 536, except 

as waived or modified in section X of 

this plan. 

8. Pay Setting for Employees on a CIP 

Employees who are on a CIP do not 

receive contribution payouts or the 

general pay increase. This action may 

result in a base pay that is below the 

assigned band. This occurs because the 

minimum rate of base pay in a pay band 

increases as the result of the general pay 

increase (5 U.S.C. 5303). For this 

situation, the employee will remain in 

the assigned band until such time as the 

CIP is resolved. Upon resolution of the 

CIP, pay or band adjustments shall be 

made in accordance with this 

document. This action will not be 

considered an adverse action, nor will it 

be grievable. 

9. Supervisory and Team Leader Pay 

Adjustments 

a. Supervisory and team leader pay 

adjustments may be approved by the 

ARDEC Director based on the 

recommendation of the PMB to 

compensate employees with supervisory 

or team leader responsibilities. Only 

employees in supervisory or team leader 

positions may be considered for the pay 

adjustment. These pay adjustments are 

funded separately from performance pay 

pools. These pay adjustments are 

increases to base pay ranging up to ten 

percent of the employee’s base pay rate. 

Pay adjustments are subject to the 

constraint that the adjustment may not 

cause the employee’s base pay to exceed 

the pay band maximum base pay. 

Criteria to be considered in determining 

the base pay increase percentage 

include: 

(1) Needs of the organization to 

attract, retain, and motivate high-quality 

supervisors/team leaders; 

(2) budgetary constraints; 

(3) years and quality of related 

experience; 

(4) relevant training; 

(5) performance appraisals and 

experience as a supervisor/team leader; 

(6) organizational level of position; 

and 

(7) impact on the organization. 

b. After the date of conversion into 

the demonstration project, a base pay 

adjustment may be considered under 

the following conditions: 

(1) New hires into supervisory/team 

leader positions will have their initial 

rate of base pay set at the supervisor’s 

discretion within the base pay range of 

the applicable pay band, subject to 

approval of the ARDEC Director. This 

rate of pay may include a base pay 

adjustment determined by using the 

ranges and criteria outlined above. 

(2) A career employee selected for a 

supervisory/team leader position that is 

within the employee’s current pay band 

may also be considered for a base pay 

adjustment. If a supervisor/team leader 

is already authorized a base pay 

adjustment and is subsequently selected 

for another supervisor/team leader 

position within the same pay band, the 

base pay adjustment will be redetermined. 

c. Supervisors and team leaders will 

not receive a base pay adjustment at the 

time of initial conversion into the 

demonstration project. The supervisor/ 

team leader pay adjustment will be 

reviewed annually, with possible 

increases or decreases based on the 

AOCS. The initial dollar amount of a 

base pay adjustment will be removed 

when the employee voluntarily leaves 

the position. The cancellation of the 

base pay adjustment under these 

circumstances is not an adverse action 

and is not subject to appeal. If an 

employee is removed from a 

supervisory/team leader position for 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3764 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

personal cause (performance or 

conduct), the base pay adjustment will 

be removed under adverse action 

procedures. However, if an employee is 

removed from a non-probationary 

supervisory/team leader position for 

conditions other than voluntary or for 

personal cause, pay retention will 

follow current law and regulations at 5 

U.S.C. 5362 and 5363 and 5 CFR part 

536, except as waived or modified in 

section X. 

10. Supervisory and Team Leader Pay 

Differentials 

a. Supervisory and team leader pay 

differentials may be used by the ARDEC 

Director to provide an incentive and 

reward supervisors and team leaders. 

Pay differentials are not funded from 

performance pay pools. A pay 

differential is a cash incentive that may 

range up to ten percent of base pay for 

supervisors and for team leaders. It is 

paid on a pay period basis with a 

specified not-to-exceed (NTE) of one 

year or less and is not included as part 

of the base pay. Criteria to be considered 

in determining the amount of the pay 

differential are the same as those 

identified for Supervisory and Team 

Leader Pay Adjustments. The 

differential must be terminated if the 

employee is removed from a 

supervisory/team leader position, 

regardless of cause. 

b. After initiation of the 

demonstration project, all personnel 

actions involving a supervisory or team 

leader differential will require a 

statement signed by the employee 

acknowledging that the differential may 

be terminated or reduced at the 

discretion of the ARDEC Director. The 

termination or reduction of the 

differential is not an adverse action and 

is not subject to appeal. 

11. Staffing Supplements 

Employees assigned to occupational 

categories and geographic areas covered 

by GS special rates will be entitled to a 

staffing supplement if the maximum 

adjusted base pay for the banded GS 

grades to which assigned is a special 

rate that exceeds the maximum GS 

locality rate for the banded grades. The 

staffing supplement is added to the base 

pay, much like locality rates are added 

to base pay. For employees being 

converted into the demonstration 

project, total pay immediately after 

conversion will be the same as 

immediately before (excluding the 

impact of any WGI buy-in for GS 

employees), but a portion of the total 

pay will be in the form of a staffing 

supplement. Adverse action and pay 

retention provisions will not apply to 

the conversion process, as there will be 

no loss or decrease in total pay. 

The staffing supplement is calculated 

as follows. Upon conversion, the 

demonstration base rate will be 

established by dividing the employee’s 

former GS basic pay (including any 

locality pay or special salary rate) or, for 

former NSPS employees, the NSPS 

adjusted base salary (the higher of GS 

special rate, NSPS targeted local market 

supplement, or locality rate) by the 

staffing factor. The staffing factor will be 

determined by dividing the maximum 

special rate for the banded grades by the 

GS unadjusted rate corresponding to 

that special rate (step 10 of the GS rate 

for the same grade as the special rate). 

The employee’s demonstration staffing 

supplement is derived by multiplying 

the demonstration base pay rate by the 

staffing factor minus one. Therefore, the 

employee’s final demonstration special 

staffing rate equals the demonstration 

base pay rate plus the staffing 

supplement. This amount will equal the 

employee’s former GS adjusted basic 

pay rate or NSPS adjusted base salary 

rate. Simplified, the formula is this: 

If an employee is in a band where the 

maximum GS adjusted basic pay or 

NSPS adjusted base salary rate for the 

banded grades is a locality rate, when 

the employee enters into the 

demonstration project, the 

demonstration base pay rate is derived 

by dividing the employee’s former GS 

adjusted basic pay rate (the higher of 

locality rate or special rate) by the 

applicable locality pay factor. The 

employee’s demonstration localityadjusted base pay rate will equal the 

employee’s former GS adjusted basic 

pay rate in accordance with the above 

provisions using the new special salary 

rate. Any GS or special rate schedule 

adjustment will require computing the 

staffing supplement again. Employees 

receiving a staffing supplement remain 

entitled to an underlying locality rate, 

which may over time supersede the 

need for a staffing supplement. If OPM 

discontinues or decreases a special rate 

schedule, pay retention provisions will 

be applied. Upon geographic movement, 

an employee who receives the staffing 

supplement will have the supplement 

recomputed. Any resulting reduction in 

pay will not be considered an adverse 

action or a basis for pay retention. 

An established base pay rate plus the 

staffing supplement will be considered 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUSEN20JA11.026</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3765 

adjusted base pay for the same purposes 

as a locality rate under 5 CFR 531.610, 

e.g., for purposes of retirement, life 

insurance, premium pay, severance pay, 

and advances in pay. It will also be used 

to compute worker’s compensation 

payments and lump-sum payments for 

accrued and accumulated annual leave. 

If an employee is in an occupational 

category covered by a new or modified 

special salary rate table, and the pay 

band to which assigned is not entitled 

to a staffing supplement, then the 

employee’s adjusted base pay may be 

reviewed and adjusted to accommodate 

the rate increase provided by the special 

salary rate table. The review may result 

in a one-time base pay increase if the 

employee’s adjusted base pay equals or 

is less than the highest special salary 

rate grade and step that exceeds the 

comparable locality grade and step. 

Demonstration project operating 

procedures will identify the officials 

responsible to make such reviews and 

determinations. 

12. Pay Retention 

For purposes of actions within the 

ARDEC demonstration project that 

provide entitlement to pay retention, the 

standard provisions of pay retention 

under 5 U.S.C. 5362 and 5363 and 5 

CFR part 536 shall apply to employees 

after conversion to the demonstration 

project, except as waived or modified in 

Section X of this plan. Wherever the 

term ‘‘grade’’ is used in the law or 

regulation, the term ‘‘pay band’’ will be 

substituted. The intent is to only use 

pay retention for all situations. Grade 

retention provisions will not be 

applicable to the ARDEC Demonstration 

Project. The ARDEC Director may grant 

pay retention to employees who meet 

general eligibility requirements, but do 

not have specific entitlement by law, 

provided they are not specifically 

excluded. 

G. Employee Development 

1. Expanded Developmental 

Opportunity Program 

The Expanded Developmental 

Opportunity Program will be available 

to all demonstration project employees. 

Expanded developmental opportunities 

complement existing developmental 

opportunities such as long-term 

training; rotational job assignments; 

developmental assignments to Army 

Materiel Command, Army, or DoD; and 

self-directed study via correspondence 

courses, local colleges, and universities. 

Each developmental opportunity must 

result in a product, service, report, or 

study that will benefit the ARDEC or 

customer organization as well as 

increase the employee’s individual 

effectiveness. The developmental 

opportunity period will not result in 

loss of (or reduction) in base pay, leave 

to which the employee is otherwise 

entitled, or credit for service time. The 

positions of employees on expanded 

developmental opportunities may be 

back-filled (i.e., with temporarily 

assigned, detailed, or promoted 

employees or with term employees). 

However, that position or its equivalent 

must be made available to the employee 

upon return from the developmental 

period. The PMB will provide written 

guidance for employees on application 

procedures and develop a process that 

will be used to review and evaluate 

applicants for development 

opportunities. 

a. Sabbatical. The ARDEC Director has 

the authority to grant paid or unpaid 

sabbaticals to all career employees. The 

purpose of a sabbatical will be to permit 

employees to engage in study or 

uncompensated work experience that 

will benefit the organization and 

contribute to the employee’s 

development and effectiveness. Each 

sabbatical must result in a product, 

service, report, or study that will benefit 

the ARDEC mission as well as increase 

the employee’s individual effectiveness. 

Various learning or developmental 

experiences may be considered, such as 

advanced academic teaching, research, 

self-directed or guided study, and onthe-job work experience. 

One paid sabbatical of up to twelve 

months in duration or one unpaid 

sabbatical of up to six months in a 

calendar year may be granted to an 

employee in any seven-year period. 

Employees will be eligible to request a 

sabbatical after completion of seven 

years of Federal service. Employees 

approved for a paid sabbatical must sign 

a service obligation agreement to 

continue in service in the ARDEC for a 

period three times the length of the 

sabbatical. If an employee voluntarily 

leaves the ARDEC organization before 

the service obligation is completed, he/ 

she is liable for repayment of expenses 

incurred by ARDEC that are associated 

with training during the sabbatical. 

Expenses do not include salary costs. 

The ARDEC Director has the authority 

to waive this requirement. Criteria for 

such waivers will be addressed in the 

operating procedures. Specific 

procedures will be developed for 

processing sabbatical applications upon 

implementation of the demonstration 

project. 

b. Critical Skills Training. The ARDEC 

Director has the authority to approve 

academic degree training consistent 

with 5 U.S.C. 4107. Training is an 

essential component of an organization 

that requires continuous acquisition of 

advanced and specialized knowledge. 

Degree training is also a critical tool for 

recruiting and retaining employees with 

or requiring critical skills. 

Each academic degree training 

program in its entirety can be approved 

based upon a complete individual 

degree study program plan; it will 

ensure continuous acquisition of 

advanced specialized knowledge 

essential to the organization and 

enhance our ability to recruit and retain 

personnel critical to the present and 

future requirements of the organization. 

Degree or certificate payment may not 

be authorized where it would result in 

a tax liability for the employee without 

the employee’s express and written 

consent. Any variance from this policy 

must be rigorously determined and 

documented. Guidelines will be 

developed to ensure competitive 

approval of degree or certificate 

payment and that such decisions are 

fully documented. Employees approved 

for degree training must sign a service 

obligation agreement to continue service 

in the ARDEC for a period three times 

the length of the training period 

commencing after the completion of the 

entire degree program. If an employee 

voluntarily leaves the ARDEC before the 

service obligation is completed, he/she 

is liable for repayment of expenses 

incurred by the ARDEC that are related 

to the critical skills training. Expenses 

do not include salary costs. The ARDEC 

Director has the authority to waive this 

requirement. Criteria for such waivers 

will be addressed in the operating 

procedures. 

c. Student Career Experience Program 

(SCEP) Service Agreement. The 

extended repayment period also applies 

to employees under the SCEP who have 

received tuition assistance. They will be 

required to sign a service agreement up 

to three times the length of the academic 

training period or periods (semesters, 

trimesters, or quarters). 

H. Reduction-in-Force (RIF) Procedures 

The competitive area may be 

determined by Occupational Family, 

lines of business, product lines, 

organizational units, funding lines, 

occupational series, functional area, 

and/or geographical location, or a 

combination of these elements, and 

must include all Demonstration Project 

employees within the defined 

competitive area. The RIF system has a 

single round of competition to replace 

the current GS two-round process. Once 

the position to be abolished has been 

identified, the incumbent of that 

position may displace another employee 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3766 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

when the incumbent has a higher 

retention standing and is fully qualified 

for the position occupied by the 

employee with a lower standing. 

Retention standing is based on tenure, 

veterans’ preference, and length of 

service augmented by performance. 

Modified term appointment and 

temporary employees are in tenure 

group III for RIF purposes. RIF 

procedures are not required when 

separating these employees when their 

appointments expire. 

Displacement is limited to one pay 

band level below the employee’s present 

pay band level within the Occupational 

Family career path. Pay band level I 

employees can displace within their 

current pay band level. A veterans’ 

preference eligible employee with a 

compensable service connected 

disability of 30 percent or more may 

displace up to two pay band levels 

below the employee’s present level 

within the Occupational Family career 

path. A pay band level I preference 

eligible employee (with a compensable 

service connected disability of 30 

percent or more) can displace within 

their current pay band. Employees 

bumped to lower pay band levels are 

entitled to pay retention. The same 

‘‘undue disruption’’ standard currently 

utilized, serves as the criteria to 

determine if an employee is fully 

qualified. 

The additional reduction-in-force 

years of service augmentation for 

performance shall be based upon the 

delta between an employee’s AOCS and 

an employee’s EOCS at the end of a 

rating cycle. The following are the years 

of service augmentation rules: 

a. Seven (7) years of service 

augmentation for each year the AOCS is 

greater than or equal to the EOCS minus 

3 (AOCS ≥ EOCS ¥3). 

b. Four (4) years of service 

augmentation for each year the AOCS is 

less than the EOCS minus 3 (AOCS < 

EOCS ¥3). 

c. Zero (0) years of service 

augmentation for each year the 

employee was placed on a CIP at any 

time during the rating cycle. 

An employee on a CIP, any time 

during the rating cycle, may only 

displace an employee who was also on 

a CIP during the same rating cycle. The 

displaced individual may similarly 

displace another employee on a CIP 

during the same rating cycle. If there is 

no position in which an employee can 

be placed by this process or assigned to 

a vacant position, that employee will be 

separated. If an employee has not been 

rated under the demonstration project, 

their rating will be considered 

acceptable and they will be given the 

full 21 years of service augmentation. 

After completion of the first or second 

rating cycle, the total years of service 

augmentation will be prorated based on 

ratings received to date. 

IV. Implementation Training 

A. Critical to the success of the 

demonstration project is the training 

developed to promote understanding of 

the broad concepts and finer details 

needed to implement and successfully 

execute this project. Pay banding, a new 

position classification system, and a 

new CBCS all represent significant 

cultural change for the organization. 

Training will be tailored to address 

employee concerns and to encourage 

comprehensive understanding of the 

demonstration project. Training will be 

required both prior to implementation 

and at various times during the life of 

the demonstration project. 

B. A training program will begin prior 

to implementation and will include 

modules tailored for employees, 

supervisors, senior managers, and 

administrative staff. Typical modules 

are: 

1. An overview of the demonstration 

project; 

2. conversion in and out of the 

system; 

3. pay banding; 

4. the CBCS; 

5. defining objectives; 

6. assigning weights; 

7. assessing performance, including 

feedback; 

8. new position descriptions; and 

9. demonstration project 

administration and formal evaluation. 

C. Various types of training are being 

considered, including videos, on-line 

tutorials, and train-the-trainer concepts. 

V. Conversion 

A. Conversion From the GS System to 

the Demonstration Project 

1. Placement Into Demonstration Project 

Occupational Families, Career Paths, 

and Pay Bands 

Conversion will be into the 

Occupational Family and career path 

that corresponds to the employee’s 

current GS grade and basic pay. If 

conversion into the demonstration 

project is accompanied by a 

simultaneous change in the geographic 

location of the employee’s duty station, 

the employee’s overall GS entitlements 

(including locality rate) in the new area 

will be determined before converting 

the employee’s pay to the demonstration 

project pay system. Employees will be 

assured of placement within the new 

system without loss of total pay. 

2. WGI Buy-In 

For GS employees, rules governing 

WGIs will continue in effect until 

conversion. Adjustments to the 

employee’s GS basic pay for WGI equity 

will be computed as of the effective date 

of conversion. WGI equity will be 

acknowledged by increasing basic pay 

by a prorated share based upon the 

number of full weeks an employee has 

completed toward the next higher step. 

Payment will equal the value of the 

employee’s next WGI times the 

proportion of the waiting period 

completed (weeks completed in waiting 

period/weeks in the waiting period) at 

the time of conversion. GS employees at 

step 10 or receiving a retained rate, on 

the day of implementation will not be 

eligible for WGI equity adjustments. GS 

employees serving on retained grade 

will receive WGI equity adjustments 

provided they are not at step 10 or 

receiving a retained rate. 

3. Conversion of Term and Temporary 

Limited Appointments 

Employees serving under a term 

appointment at the time of 

demonstration project implementation 

will be converted to the modified term 

appointment if all requirements (refer to 

III.D.6, Modified Term Appointments) 

have been satisfied. Employees serving 

under temporary limited appointments 

at the time of demonstration 

implementation will be converted to 

temporary limited appointments. 

4. Conversion of Special Salary Rate 

Employees 

Employees who are in positions 

covered by a special salary rate prior to 

the demonstration project will no longer 

be considered a special salary rate 

employee under the demonstration 

project. These employees will be 

eligible for full locality pay. The 

adjusted pay for these employees will 

not change. The employees will receive 

a new staffing adjusted base pay rate 

computed under the staffing 

supplement rules in section III.F.11. 

5. Probationary Periods 

a. Initial probationary period. GS 

employees who have completed an 

initial probationary period prior to 

conversion from GS will not be required 

to serve a new or extended initial 

probationary period. GS employees who 

are serving an initial probationary 

period upon conversion from GS will 

serve the time remaining on their initial 

probationary period. 

b. Supervisory probationary period. 

GS employees who have completed a 

supervisory probationary period prior to 

conversion from GS will not be required 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3767 

to serve a new or extended supervisory 

probationary period while in their 

current position. GS employees who are 

serving a supervisory probationary 

period upon conversion from GS will 

serve the time remaining on their 

supervisory probationary period. 

6. Transition Equity 

During the first 12 months following 

conversion to the demonstration project, 

management may approve certain 

adjustments within the pay band for pay 

equity reasons stemming from 

conversion. For example, if an employee 

would have been otherwise promoted 

but demonstration project pay band 

placement no longer provides the 

opportunity for promotion, a pay equity 

adjustment may be authorized provided 

the adjustment does not cause the 

employee’s base pay to exceed the 

maximum rate of his or her assigned pay 

band and the employee’s performance 

warrants an adjustment. The decision to 

grant a pay equity adjustment is at the 

sole discretion of the ARDEC Director 

and is not subject to employee appeal 

procedures. 

During the first 12 months following 

conversion, management may approve 

an adjustment of not more than 20 

percent, provided the adjustment does 

not cause the employee’s base pay to 

exceed the maximum rate of his or her 

assigned pay band and the employee’s 

performance warrants an adjustment, to 

mitigate compensation inequities that 

may be caused by artifacts of the process 

of conversion into STRL pay bands. 

B. Conversion From NSPS to the 

Demonstration Project 

1. Placement Into Demonstration Project 

Occupational Families, Career Paths, 

Pay Plans, and Pay Bands 

The employee’s NSPS occupational 

series, pay plan, pay band, and 

supervisory code will be considered 

upon converting into the demonstration 

project as follows. 

a. Determine the appropriate 

demonstration project pay plan. 

Employees will be converted into an 

occupational family career path and pay 

plan based on the occupational series of 

their position. In cases where the 

employee is assigned to a NSPS-unique 

occupational series, a corresponding 

OPM occupational series must be 

identified using OPM GS classification 

standards and guidance to determine 

the proper demonstration project pay 

plan. 

b. Determine the appropriate 

demonstration project pay band. The 

appropriate pay band will be 

determined by establishing the 

corresponding GS grade for the 

employee’s NSPS position using OPM 

GS classification standards and 

guidance. Once the GS grade has been 

determined, the employee’s position 

will be placed in the appropriate 

demonstration project pay band in the 

occupational family career path. 

2. Pay Upon Conversion From NSPS 

Conversion from NSPS into the 

demonstration project will be 

accomplished with full employee pay 

protection. Adverse action provisions 

will not apply to the conversion action. 

In accordance with section 1113(c)(1) of 

NDAA 2010, which prohibits a loss of 

or decrease in pay upon transition from 

NSPS, employees converting to the 

demonstration project will retain the 

adjusted salary (as defined in 5 CFR 

9901.304) from their NSPS permanent 

or temporary position at the time the 

position converts. Upon conversion, the 

retained NSPS adjusted salary may not 

exceed Level IV of the Executive 

Schedule plus five percent. If the 

employee’s base pay exceeds the 

maximum rate for his or her assigned 

demonstration project pay band, the 

employee will be placed on indefinite 

pay retention until an event, as 

described in 5 CFR 536.308, results in 

a loss of eligibility for or termination of 

pay retention. If an employee’s base pay 

is less than the minimum rate for his/ 

her assigned demonstration project pay 

band, the employee will have his/her 

base pay rate increased to the minimum 

of the pay band. 

Employees covered by an NSPS 

targeted local market supplement 

(TLMS) prior to conversion to the 

demonstration project will no longer be 

covered by a TLMS. Instead, they will 

receive a staffing supplement. The 

adjusted base pay upon conversion will 

not change. 

3. Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) 

Status 

Since FLSA provisions were not 

waived under NSPS and duties do not 

change upon conversion to the 

demonstration project, the FLSA status 

determination will remain the same 

upon conversion. Employees will be 

converted to the demonstration project 

with the same FLSA status they had 

under NSPS. 

4. Transition Equity 

During the first 12 months following 

conversion to the demonstration project, 

management may approve certain 

adjustments within the pay band for pay 

equity reasons stemming from 

conversion. For example, if an employee 

would have been otherwise promoted 

but demonstration project pay band 

placement no longer provides the 

opportunity for promotion, a pay equity 

adjustment may be authorized provided 

the adjustment does not cause the 

employee’s base pay to exceed the 

maximum rate of his or her assigned pay 

band and the employee’s performance 

warrants an adjustment. The decision to 

grant a pay equity adjustment is at the 

sole discretion of the ARDEC Director 

and is not subject to employee appeal 

procedures. 

During the first 12 months following 

conversion, management may approve 

an adjustment of not more than 20 

percent, provided the adjustment does 

not cause the employee’s base pay to 

exceed the maximum rate of his or her 

assigned pay band and the employee’s 

performance warrants an adjustment, to 

mitigate compensation inequities that 

may be caused by artifacts of the process 

of conversion into STRL pay bands. 

5. Pay Band Retention 

Employees converting from NSPS to 

the demonstration project will not be 

granted pay band retention based on the 

pay band formerly assigned to their 

NSPS position. 

6. Converting Employees on NSPS Term 

and Temporary Appointments 

a. Employees serving under term 

appointments at the time of conversion 

to the demonstration project will be 

converted to modified term 

appointments provided they were hired 

for their current positions under 

competitive procedures. These 

employees will be eligible for 

conversion to career or careerconditional appointments in the 

competitive service provided they: 

(1) Have served two years of 

continuous service in the term position; 

(2) were selected for the term position 

under competitive procedures; and 

(3) are performing at a satisfactory 

level. 

Converted term employees who do not 

meet these criteria may continue on 

their term appointment up to the not-toexceed date established under NSPS. 

Extensions of term appointments after 

conversion may be granted in 

accordance with 5 CFR part 316, subpart 

D. 

b. Employees serving under 

temporary appointments under NSPS 

when their organization converts to the 

demonstration project will be converted 

and may continue on their temporary 

appointment up to the not-to-exceed 

date established under NSPS. 

Extensions of temporary appointments 

after conversion may be granted in 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3768 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

accordance with 5 CFR 213.104 for 

excepted service employees and 5 CFR 

part 316, subpart D, for competitive 

service employees. 

7. Probationary Periods 

a. Initial probationary period. NSPS 

employees who have completed an 

initial probationary period prior to 

conversion from NSPS will not be 

required to serve a new or extended 

initial probationary period. NSPS 

employees who are serving an initial 

probationary period upon conversion 

from NSPS will serve the time 

remaining on their initial probationary 

period. 

b. Supervisory probationary period. 

NSPS employees who have completed a 

supervisory probationary period prior to 

conversion from NSPS will not be 

required to serve a new or extended 

supervisory probationary period while 

in their current position. NSPS 

employees who are serving a 

supervisory probationary period upon 

conversion from NSPS will serve the 

time remaining on their supervisory 

probationary period. 

C. Conversion From Other Personnel 

Systems 

Employees who enter the 

demonstration project from other 

personnel systems (e.g., Defense 

Civilian Intelligence Personnel System, 

Civilian Acquisition Workforce 

Demonstration Project, or other STRLs) 

will be subject to the pay rules that 

govern conversion out of their 

respective systems. Conversion into Lab 

Demo will be based upon the position 

classification of the employee’s new 

position and the Lab Demo rules, 

consistent with the intent as outlined 

for GS and NSPS above. 

D. Movement out of the ARDEC 

Demonstration Project 

1. Termination of Coverage Under the 

ARDEC Demonstration Project Pay Plans 

In the event employees’ coverage 

under the ARDEC demonstration project 

pay plans is terminated, employees 

move with their demonstration project 

position to another system applicable to 

ARDEC employees. The grade of their 

demonstration project position in the 

new system will be based upon the 

position classification criteria of the 

gaining system. Employees when 

converted to their positions classified 

under the new system will be eligible 

for pay retention under 5 CFR part 536, 

if applicable. 

2. Determining a GS-Equivalent Grade 

and GS-Equivalent Rate of Pay for Pay 

Setting Purposes When an ARDEC 

Employee’s Coverage by a 

Demonstration Project Pay Plan 

Terminates or the Employee Voluntarily 

Exits the ARDEC Demonstration Project 

a. If a demonstration project employee 

is moving to a GS or other pay system 

position, the following procedures will 

be used to translate the employee’s 

project pay band to a GS-equivalent 

grade and the employee’s project base 

pay to the GS-equivalent rate of pay for 

pay setting purposes. The equivalent GS 

grade and GS rate of pay must be 

determined before movement out of the 

demonstration project and any 

accompanying geographic movement, 

promotion, or other simultaneous 

action. For lateral reassignments, the 

equivalent GS grade and rate will 

become the employee’s converted GS 

grade and rate after leaving the 

demonstration project (before any other 

action). For transfers, promotions, and 

other actions, the converted GS grade 

and rate will be used in applying any 

GS pay administration rules applicable 

in connection with the employee’s 

movement out of the project (e.g., 

promotion rules, highest previous rate 

rules, pay retention rules), as if the GS 

converted grade and rate were actually 

in effect immediately before the 

employee left the demonstration project. 

(1) Equivalent GS-Grade-Setting 

Provisions 

An employee in a pay band 

corresponding to a single GS grade is 

provided that grade as the GSequivalent grade. An employee in a pay 

band corresponding to two or more 

grades is determined to have a GSequivalent grade corresponding to one 

of those grades according to the 

following rules: 

(a) The employee’s adjusted base pay 

under the demonstration project 

(including any locality payment or 

staffing supplement) is compared with 

step 4 rates in the highest applicable GS 

rate range. For this purpose, a GS rate 

range includes a rate in: 

i. the GS base schedule; 

ii. the locality rate schedule for the 

locality pay area in which the position 

is located; or 

iii. the appropriate special rate 

schedule for the employee’s 

occupational series, as applicable. 

If the series is a two-grade interval 

series, only odd-numbered grades are 

considered below GS–11. 

(b) If the employee’s adjusted base 

pay under the demonstration project 

equals or exceeds the applicable step 4 

adjusted base pay rate of the highest GS 

grade in the band, the employee is 

converted to that grade. 

(c) If the employee’s adjusted base pay 

under the demonstration project is 

lower than the applicable step 4 

adjusted base pay rate of the highest 

grade, the adjusted base pay under the 

demonstration project is compared with 

the step 4 adjusted base pay rate of the 

second highest grade in the employee’s 

pay band. If the employee’s adjusted 

base pay under the demonstration 

project equals or exceeds the step 4 

adjusted base pay rate of the second 

highest grade, the employee is 

converted to that grade. 

(d) This process is repeated for each 

successively lower grade in the band 

until a grade is found in which the 

employee’s adjusted base pay under the 

demonstration project rate equals or 

exceeds the applicable step 4 adjusted 

base pay rate of the grade. The employee 

is then converted at that grade. If the 

employee’s adjusted base pay is below 

the step 4 adjusted base pay rate of the 

lowest grade in the band, the employee 

is converted to the lowest grade. 

(e) Exception: An employee will not 

be provided a lower grade than the 

grade held by the employee 

immediately preceding a conversion, 

lateral reassignment, or lateral transfer 

into the project, unless since that time 

the employee has either undergone a 

reduction in band or a reduction within 

the same pay band due to unacceptable 

performance. 

(2) Equivalent GS-Rate-of-Pay-Setting 

Provisions 

An employee’s pay within the 

converted GS grade is set by converting 

the employee’s demonstration project 

rates of pay to GS rates of pay in 

accordance with the following rules: 

(a) The pay conversion is done before 

any geographic movement or other payrelated action that coincides with the 

employee’s movement or conversion out 

of the demonstration project. 

(b) An employee’s adjusted base pay 

under the demonstration project (i.e., 

including any locality payment or 

staffing supplement) is converted to a 

GS adjusted base pay rate on the highest 

applicable GS rate range for the 

converted GS grade. For this purpose, a 

GS rate range includes a rate range in: 

i. the GS base schedule, 

ii. an applicable locality rate 

schedule, or 

iii. an applicable special rate 

schedule. 

(c) If the highest applicable GS rate 

range is a locality pay rate range, the 

employee’s adjusted base pay under the 

demonstration project is converted to a 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3769 

GS locality rate of pay. If this rate falls 

between two steps in the localityadjusted schedule, the rate must be set 

at the higher step. The converted GS 

unadjusted rate of base pay would be 

the GS base rate corresponding to the 

converted GS locality rate (i.e., same 

step position). 

(d) If the highest applicable GS rate 

range is a special rate range, the 

employee’s adjusted base pay under the 

demonstration project is converted to a 

special rate. If this rate falls between 

two steps in the special rate schedule, 

the rate must be set at the higher step. 

The converted GS unadjusted rate of 

base pay will be the GS rate 

corresponding to the converted special 

rate (i.e., same step position). 

(3) Employees With Pay Retention 

If an employee is receiving a retained 

rate under the demonstration project, 

the employee’s GS-equivalent grade is 

the highest grade encompassed in his or 

her pay band level. Demonstration 

project operating procedures will 

outline the methodology for 

determining the GS-equivalent pay rate 

for an employee retaining a rate under 

the demonstration project. 

VI. Other Provisions 

A. Personnel Administration 

All personnel laws, regulations, and 

guidelines not waived by this plan will 

remain in effect. Basic employee rights 

will be safeguarded and Merit System 

Principles will be maintained. Servicing 

CPACs will continue to process 

personnel-related actions and provide 

consultative and other appropriate 

services. 

B. Automation 

The ARDEC will continue to use 

standard systems such as the Defense 

Civilian Personnel Data System 

(DCPDS) for the processing of 

personnel-related data. Payroll servicing 

will continue from the respective 

payroll offices. 

An automated tool will be used to 

support computation of performance 

related pay increases and bonus and 

other personnel processes and systems 

associated with this project. 

C. Experimentation and Revision 

Many aspects of a demonstration 

project are experimental. Modifications 

may be made from time to time as 

experience is gained, results are 

analyzed, and conclusions are reached 

on how the new system is working. 

DoDI 1400.37, July 28, 2009, provides 

instructions for making minor changes 

to an existing demonstration project and 

requesting new initiatives. 

VII. Project Duration 

Public Law 103–337 removed any 

mandatory expiration date for section 

342(b) demonstration projects. The 

ARDEC, DA, and DoD will ensure this 

project is evaluated for the first five 

years after implementation in 

accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4703. 

Modifications to the original evaluation 

plan or any new evaluation will ensure 

the project is evaluated for its 

effectiveness, its impact on mission, and 

any potential adverse impact on any 

employee groups. Major changes and 

modifications to the interventions 

would be made if formative evaluation 

data warrants and will be published in 

the Federal Register to the extent 

required. At the five-year point, the 

demonstration will be reexamined for 

permanent implementation, 

modification and additional testing, or 

termination of the entire demonstration 

project. 

VIII. Evaluation Plan 

A. Overview 

Chapter 47 of 5 U.S.C. requires that an 

evaluation be performed to measure the 

effectiveness of the demonstration 

project and its impact on improving 

public management. A comprehensive 

evaluation plan for the entire 

demonstration program, originally 

covering 24 DoD laboratories, was 

developed by a joint OPM/DoD 

Evaluation Committee in 1995. This 

plan was submitted to the Office of 

Defense Research and Engineering and 

was subsequently approved. The main 

purpose of the evaluation is to 

determine whether the waivers granted 

result in a more effective personnel 

system and improvements in ultimate 

outcomes (i.e., organizational 

effectiveness, mission accomplishment, 

and customer satisfaction). 

B. Evaluation Model 

1. Appendix D shows an intervention 

model for the evaluation of the 

demonstration project. The model is 

designed to evaluate two levels of 

organizational performance: 

Intermediate and ultimate outcomes. 

The intermediate outcomes are defined 

as the results from specific personnel 

system changes and the associated 

waivers of law and regulation expected 

to improve human resource (HR) 

management (i.e., cost, quality, and 

timeliness). The ultimate outcomes are 

determined through improved 

organizational performance, mission 

accomplishment, and customer 

satisfaction. Although it is not possible 

to establish a direct causal link between 

changes in the HR management system 

and organizational effectiveness, it is 

hypothesized that the new HR system 

will contribute to improved 

organizational effectiveness. 

2. Organizational performance 

measures established by the 

organization will be used to evaluate the 

impact of a new HR system on the 

ultimate outcomes. The evaluation of 

the new HR system for any given 

organization will take into account the 

influence of three factors on 

organizational performance: Context, 

degree of implementation, and support 

of implementation. The context factor 

refers to the impact which intervening 

variables (i.e., downsizing, changes in 

mission, or the economy) can have on 

the effectiveness of the program. The 

degree of implementation considers: 

a. The extent to which the HR changes 

are given a fair trial period; 

b. the extent to which the changes are 

implemented; and 

c. the extent to which the changes 

conform to the HR interventions as 

planned. 

The support of implementation factor 

accounts for the impact that factors such 

as training, internal regulations, and 

automated support systems have on the 

support available for program 

implementation. The support for 

program implementation factor can also 

be affected by the personal 

characteristics (e.g., attitudes) of 

individuals who are implementing the 

program. 

3. The degree to which the project is 

implemented and operated will be 

tracked to ensure that the evaluation 

results reflect the project as it was 

intended. Data will be collected to 

measure changes in both intermediate 

and ultimate outcomes as well as any 

unintended outcomes, which may 

happen as a result of any organizational 

change. In addition, the evaluation will 

track the impact of the project and its 

interventions on veterans and other 

protected groups, the Merit System 

Principles, and the Prohibited Personnel 

Practices. Additional measures may be 

added to the model in the event that 

changes or modifications are made to 

the demonstration plan. 

4. The intervention model at 

Appendix D will be used to measure the 

effectiveness of the personnel system 

interventions implemented. The 

intervention model specifies each 

personnel system change or intervention 

that will be measured and shows: 

a. The expected effects of the 

intervention, 

b. the corresponding measures, and 

c. the data sources for obtaining the 

measures. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3770 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

Although the model makes predictions 

about the outcomes of specific 

intervention, causal attributions about 

the full impact of specific interventions 

will not always be possible for several 

reasons. For example, many of the 

initiatives are expected to interact with 

each other and contribute to the same 

outcomes. In addition, the impact of 

changes in the HR system may be 

mitigated by context variables (e.g., the 

job market, legislation, and internal 

support systems) or support factors (e.g., 

training, automation support systems). 

C. Evaluation 

A modified quasi-experimental design 

will be used for the evaluation of the 

STRL Personnel Demonstration 

Program. Because most of the eligible 

laboratories are participating in the 

program, a title 5 U.S.C. comparison 

group will be compiled from the Central 

Personnel Data File (CPDF). This 

comparison group will consist of 

workforce data from Government-wide 

research organizations in civilian 

Federal agencies with missions and job 

series matching those in the DoD 

laboratories. This comparison group 

will be used primarily in the analysis of 

pay banding costs and turnover rates. 

D. Method of Data Collection 

1. Data from several sources will be 

used in the evaluation. Information from 

existing management information 

systems and from personnel office 

records will be supplemented with 

perceptual survey data from employees 

to assess the effectiveness and 

perception of the project. The multiple 

sources of data collection will provide 

a more complete picture as to how the 

interventions are working. The 

information gathered from one source 

will serve to validate information 

obtained through another source. In so 

doing, the confidence of overall findings 

will be strengthened as the different 

collection methods substantiate each 

other. 

2. Both quantitative and qualitative 

data will be used when evaluating 

outcomes. The following data will be 

collected: 

a. Workforce data; 

b. personnel office data; 

c. employee attitude surveys; 

d. focus group data; 

e. local site historian logs and 

implementation information; 

f. customer satisfaction surveys; and 

g. core measures of organizational 

performance. 

3. The evaluation effort will consist of 

two phases, formative and summative 

evaluation, covering at least five years to 

permit inter- and intra-organizational 

estimates of effectiveness. The formative 

evaluation phase will include baseline 

data collection and analysis, 

implementation evaluation, and interim 

assessments. The formal reports and 

interim assessments will provide 

information on the accuracy of project 

operation, and current information on 

impact of the project on veterans and 

protected groups, Merit System 

Principles, and Prohibited Personnel 

Practices. The summative evaluation 

will focus on an overall assessment of 

project outcomes after five years. The 

final report will provide information on 

how well the HR system changes 

achieved the desired goals, which 

interventions were most effective, and 

whether the results can be generalized 

to other Federal installations. 

IX. Demonstration Project Costs 

A. Cost Discipline 

An objective of the demonstration 

project is to ensure in-house cost 

discipline. A baseline will be 

established at the start of the project and 

labor expenditures will be tracked 

yearly. Implementation costs (including 

project development, automation costs, 

step buy-in costs, and evaluation costs) 

are considered one-time costs and will 

not be included in the cost discipline. 

The PMB will track personnel cost 

changes and recommend adjustments if 

required to achieve the objective of cost 

discipline. 

B. Developmental Costs 

Costs associated with the 

development of the personnel 

demonstration project include software 

automation, training, and project 

evaluation. All funding will be provided 

through the organization’s budget. The 

Projected Annual Expenses are 

summarized in Table 6. Project 

evaluation costs are not expected to 

continue beyond the first five years 

unless the results and external 

requirements warrant further 

evaluation. 

TABLE 6—PROJECTED ANNUAL EXPENSES

FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 

Training .................................................................................................... 0K 15K 10K 5K 5K 

Project Evaluation .................................................................................... 0K 80K 30K 30K 30K 

Design ...................................................................................................... 40K 0K 0K 0K 0K 

Automation ............................................................................................... 97K 400K 400K 50K 50K 

Totals ................................................................................................ 137K 495K 440K 85K 85K 

X. Required Waivers to Law and 

Regulation 

Public Law 106–398 gave the DoD the 

authority to experiment with several 

personnel management innovations. In 

addition to the authorities granted by 

the law, the following are waivers of law 

and regulation that will be necessary for 

implementation of the demonstration 

project. In due course, additional laws 

and regulations may be identified for 

waiver request. 

The following waivers and 

adaptations of certain title 5 U.S.C. and 

5 CFR provisions are required only to 

the extent that these statutory 

provisions limit or are inconsistent with 

the actions contemplated under this 

demonstration project. Nothing in this 

plan is intended to preclude the 

demonstration project from adopting or 

incorporating any law or regulation 

enacted, adopted, or amended after the 

effective date of this demonstration 

project. 

A. Waivers to Title 5, U.S.C. 

Chapter 5, section 552a: Records 

maintained on individuals. This section 

is waived only to the extent required to 

clarify that volunteers under the 

Volunteer Emeritus Corps are 

considered employees of the Federal 

government for purposes of this section. 

Chapter 31, section 3111: Acceptance 

of Volunteer Service. Waived to allow 

for a Volunteer Emeritus Corps in 

addition to student volunteers. 

Chapter 33, subchapter 1, section 

3318(a): Competitive Service, Selection 

from Certificate. Waived to the extent 

necessary to eliminate the requirement 

for selection using the ‘‘Rule of Three.’’ 

Chapter 33, section 3319: Alternative 

Ranking and Selection Procedures. This 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3771 

section is waived to eliminate quality 

categories. 

Chapter 33, section 3321: Competitive 

Service; Probationary Period. This 

section waived only to the extent 

necessary to replace grade with ‘‘pay 

band level.’’ 

Chapter 33, section 3341: Details. 

Waived in entirety. 

Chapter 41, section 4107a(1) and b(2) 

to the extent required to allow ARDEC 

to pay for all courses related to a degree 

program approved by the ARDEC 

Director. 

Chapter 41, section 4108(a)–(c): 

Employee Agreements; Service After 

Training. Waived to the extent 

necessary to: (1) Provide that the 

employee’s service obligation is to the 

ARDEC organization for the period of 

the required service; (2) permit the 

Director, ARDEC, to waive in whole or 

in part a right of recovery; and (3) 

require employees under the Student 

Career Experience Program who have 

received tuition assistance to sign a 

service agreement up to three times the 

length of the training. 

Chapter 43, section 4302 and 4303: 

Waived to the extent necessary to: (1) 

Substitute pay band for grade and (2) 

provide that moving to a lower pay band 

as a result of not receiving the general 

pay increase because of poor 

performance is not an action covered by 

the provisions of sections 4303(a) 

through (d). 

Chapter 43, section 4304(b)(1) and (3): 

Responsibilities of the OPM. Waived in 

its entirety to remove the 

responsibilities of the OPM with respect 

to the performance appraisal system. 

Chapter 45, subchapter I, section 

4502(a) and (b)-Waiver to permit 

ARDEC to approve awards up to 

$25,000 for individual employees. 

Chapter 51, sections 5101–5112: 

Classification. Waived as necessary to 

allow for the demonstration project pay 

banding system. 

Chapter 53, sections 5301, 5302 (8) 

and (9), 5303, and 5304: Pay 

Comparability System. Sections 5301, 

5302, and 5304 are waived to the extent 

necessary to allow: 

(1) Demonstration project employees 

to be treated as GS employees and (2) 

basic rates of pay under the 

demonstration project to be treated as 

scheduled rates of pay. Occupational 

Family Chapter 53, section 5305: 

Special Pay Authority. Waived to the 

extent necessary to allow for use of a 

staffing supplement in lieu of the 

special pay authority. 

Chapter 53, sections 5331–5336: 

General Schedule Pay Rates. Waived in 

its entirety to allow for the 

demonstration project’s pay banding 

system and pay provisions. 

Chapter 53, sections 5361–5366: 

Grade and Pay Retention. These sections 

waived to the extent necessary to: (1) 

Replace grade with ‘‘pay band;’’ and (2) 

allow Demonstration project employees 

to be treated as GS employees. 

Chapter 55, section 5542(a)(1)–(2): 

Overtime rates; computation. Waived to 

the extent necessary to provide that the 

GS–10 minimum special rate (if any) for 

the special rate category to which a 

project employee belongs is deemed to 

be the ‘‘applicable special rate’’ in 

applying the pay cap provisions. 

Chapter 55, section 5545(d): 

Hazardous duty differential. Waived to 

the extent necessary to allow 

demonstration project employees to be 

treated as GS employees. 

Chapter 55, section 5547(a)–(b): 

Limitation on premium pay. Waived to 

the extent necessary to provide that the 

GS–15 maximum special rate (if any) for 

the special rate category to which an 

employee belongs is deemed to be the 

applicable special rate in applying the 

pay cap provisions in 5 U.S.C. 5547. 

Chapter 57, section 5753, 5754, and 

5755: Recruitment and relocation 

bonuses, retention incentives and 

supervisory differentials. Waived to the 

extent necessary to allow: (1) Employees 

and positions under the demonstration 

project to be treated as employees and 

positions under the GS; and (2) that 

management may offer a bonus to 

incentivize geographic mobility to a 

SCEP student. 

Chapter 59, section 5941: Allowances 

based on living costs and conditions of 

environment; employees stationed 

outside continental U.S. or Alaska. 

Waived to the extent necessary to 

provide that cost of living allowances 

paid to employees under the 

demonstration project are paid in 

accordance with regulations prescribed 

by the President (as delegated to OPM). 

Chapter 75, sections 7501(1), 

7511(a)(1)(A)(ii), and 7511(a)(1)(C)(ii): 

Adverse Actions—Definitions. Waived 

to the extent necessary to allow for up 

to a three-year probationary period and 

to permit termination during the 

extended probationary period without 

using adverse action procedures for 

those employees serving a probationary 

period under an initial appointment 

except for those with veterans’ 

preference. 

Chapter 75, section 7512(3): Adverse 

actions. Waived to the extent necessary 

to replace ‘‘Grade’’ with ‘‘Pay Band.’’ 

Chapter 75, section 7512(4): Adverse 

actions. Waived to the extent necessary 

to provide that adverse action 

provisions do not apply to: (1) 

Conversions from GS special rates to 

demonstration project pay, as long as 

total pay is not reduced; (2) reductions 

in pay due to the removal of a 

supervisory or team leader pay 

adjustment upon voluntary movement 

to a non-supervisory or non-team leader 

position; and (3) reduction in 

supervisory pay due to a performance 

review. 

B. Waivers to Title 5, CFR 

Part 300, sections 300.601 through 

605: Time-in-Grade restrictions. Waived 

to eliminate time-in-grade restrictions in 

the demonstration project. 

Part 308, sections 308.101 through 

308.103: Volunteer service. Waived to 

allow for a Volunteer Emeritus Corps in 

addition to student volunteers. 

Part 315, section 315.801(a), 

315.801(b)(1), (c), and (e), and 

315.802(a) and (b)(1): Probationary 

period and Length of probationary 

period. Waived to the extent necessary 

to allow for up to a three-year 

probationary period and to permit 

termination during the extended 

probationary period without using 

adverse action procedures for those 

employees serving a probationary 

period under an initial appointment 

except for those with veterans’ 

preference. 

Part 315, section 315.901 and 315.907: 

Probation on Initial Appointment to a 

Supervisory or Managerial Position. 

This section waived only to the extent 

necessary to replace ‘‘grade’’ with ‘‘pay 

band level.’’ 

Part 316, sections 316.301, 316.303, 

and 316.304: Term Employment. These 

sections are waived to allow modified 

term appointments as described in this 

Federal Register notice. 

Part 332, sections 332.401 and 

332.404: Order on Registers and Order 

of Selection from Certificates. These 

sections are waived to the extent 

necessary to allow: (1) No rating and 

ranking when there are 15 or fewer 

qualified applicants and no preference 

eligibles; (2) the hiring and appointment 

authorities as described in this Federal 

Register notice; and (3) elimination of 

the ‘‘rule of three.’’ 

Part 335, section 335.103: Agency 

promotion programs. Waived to the 

extent necessary to extend the length of 

details and temporary promotions 

without requiring competitive 

procedures or numerous short-term 

renewals. 

Part 337, section 337.101(a): Rating 

applicants. Waived to the extent 

necessary to allow referral without 

rating when there are 15 or fewer 

qualified candidates and no qualified 

preference eligibles. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3772 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

Part 340, subpart A, subpart B, and 

subpart C: Other than Full-Time Career 

Employment. These subparts are waived 

to the extent necessary to allow a 

Volunteer Emeritus Corps. 

Part 351, Reduction in Force. This 

part is waived to the extent necessary to 

allow provisions of the RIF plan as 

described in this Federal Register 

notice. In accordance with this FR, 

ARDEC will define the competitive area, 

retention standing, and displacement 

limitations. Specific waivers include: 

Sections 351.402–351.404: Scope of 

Competition: this part is waived to the 

extent necessary to allow for 

modification of the competitive area; 

Sections 351.501–351.504: Retention 

Standing: this part is waived to the 

extent necessary to allow for 

modification of the calculation of the 

retention standing; 

Sections 351.601–351.608: Release 

from Competitive Level: this part is 

waived to the extent necessary to allow 

for the use of pay bands in lieu of 

grades; and 

Section 351.701: Assignment 

involving displacement. Waived to the 

extent that bump and retreat rights are 

limited to one pay band with the 

exception of 30 percent preference 

eligibles who are limited to two pay 

bands (or equivalent of five GS grades), 

and to limit the assignment rights of 

employees with an unacceptable current 

rating of record to a position held by 

another employee with an unacceptable 

rating of record. 

Part 410, section 410.308(a) and (c) 

sufficient to allow ARDEC to pay for all 

courses related to an academic degree 

program approved by the ARDEC 

Director. 

Part 410, section 410.309: Agreements 

to continue in service. Waived to the 

extent necessary to allow the ARDEC 

Director to determine requirements 

related to continued service agreements, 

including employees under the Student 

Career Experience Program who have 

received tuition assistance. 

Part 430, subpart B: Performance 

Appraisal for GS and Certain Other 

Employees. Waived to the extent 

necessary to be consistent with the 

CBCS. 

Part 430, section 430.208(a)(1) and (2): 

Rating Performance. Waived to allow 

presumptive ratings for new employees 

hired 90 days or less before the end of 

the appraisal cycle or for other 

situations not providing adequate time 

for an appraisal. 

Part 432, sections 432.101–432.105: 

Regarding performance based reduction 

in grade and removal actions. These 

sections are waived to the extent 

necessary to: (1) Replace grade with 

‘‘pay band’’; (2) exclude reductions in 

pay band level not accompanied by a 

reduction in pay; and (3) allow 

provisions of CBCS. For employees who 

are reduced in pay band level without 

a reduction in pay, sections 432.105 and 

432.106 (a) do not apply. 

Part 451, subpart A, section 

451.103(c)(2): Waived with respect to 

performance awards under the ARDEC 

CBCS. 

Part 451, sections 451.106(b) and 

451.107(b): Awards. Waived to permit 

ARDEC to approve awards up to 

$25,000 for individual employees. 

Part 511, subpart A: General 

Provisions and subpart B: Coverage of 

the GS. Waived to the extent necessary 

to allow for the demonstration project 

classification system and pay banding 

structure. 

Part 511, section 511.601: 

Applicability of regulations. 

Classification appeals modified to the 

extent that white collar positions 

established under the project plan, 

although specifically excluded from title 

5 CFR, are covered by the classification 

appeal process outlined in this FRN 

section III.B.5., as amended below. 

Part 511, section 511.603(a): Right to 

appeal. Waived to the extent necessary 

to substitute pay band for grade. 

Part 511, section 511.607(b): NonAppealable Issues. Add to the list of 

issues that are neither appealable nor 

reviewable, the assignment of series 

under the project plan to appropriate 

Occupational Families and the 

demonstration project classification 

criteria. 

Part 530, subpart C: Special Rate 

Schedules for Recruitment and 

Retention. Waived in its entirety to 

allow for staffing supplements. 

Part 531, subparts B: Determining 

Rate of Basic Pay. Waived to the extent 

necessary to allow for pay setting and 

pay for performance under the 

provisions of the demonstration project. 

Part 531, subparts D and E: WithinGrade Increases and Quality Step 

Increases. Waived in its entirety. 

Part 531, subpart F: Locality-Based 

Comparability Payments. Waived to the 

extent necessary to allow (1) 

demonstration project employees to be 

treated as GS employees, and (2) base 

rates of pay under the demonstration 

project to be treated as scheduled 

annual rates of pay. 

Part 536: Grade and Pay Retention: 

These sections waived to the extent 

necessary to: (1) Replace grade with 

‘‘pay band;’’ (2) allow demonstration 

project employees to be treated as GS 

employees; and (3) to allow provisions 

of this Federal Register notice 

pertaining to ARDEC pay band and pay 

retention provisions. 

Part 550, sections 550.105 and 

550.106: Bi-weekly and annual 

maximum earnings limitations. Waived 

to the extent necessary to provide that 

the GS–15 maximum special rate (if 

any) for the special rate category to 

which a project employee belongs is 

deemed to be the applicable special rate 

in applying the pay cap provisions in 5 

U.S.C. 5547. 

Part 550, section 550.703: Definitions. 

Waived to the extent necessary to 

modify the definition of ‘‘reasonable 

offer’’ by replacing ‘‘two grade or pay 

levels’’ with ‘‘one band level’’ and ‘‘grade 

or pay level’’ with ‘‘band level.’’ 

Part 550, section 550.902: Definitions. 

Waived to the extent necessary to allow 

demonstration project employees to be 

treated as GS employees. 

Part 575, subparts A, B, and C: 

Recruitment, Relocation, and Retention 

Incentives. Waived to the extent 

necessary to allow: (1) Employees and 

positions under the demonstration 

project covered by pay banding to be 

treated as employees and positions 

under the GS; (2) Occupational Family 

relocation incentives to new SCEP 

students; and (3) relocation incentives 

to SCEP students whose worksite is in 

a different geographic location than that 

of the college enrolled. 

Part 575, subpart D: Supervisory 

Differentials. Subpart D is waived in its 

entirety. 

Part 591, subpart B: Cost-of-Living 

Allowance and Post Differential—Nonforeign Areas. Waived to the extent 

necessary to allow demonstration 

project employees to be treated as 

employees under the GS system. 

Part 752, sections 752.101, 752.201, 

752.301 and 752.401: Principal statutory 

requirements and Coverage. Waived to 

the extent necessary to allow for up to 

a three-year probationary period and to 

permit termination during the extended 

probationary period without using 

adverse action procedures for those 

employees serving a probationary 

period under an initial appointment 

except for those with veterans’ 

preference. 

Part 752, section 752.401: Coverage. 

Waived to the extent necessary to 

replace grade with pay band and to 

provide that a reduction in pay band 

level is not an adverse action if it results 

from the employee’s rate of base pay 

being exceeded by the minimum rate of 

base pay for his/her pay band. 

Part 752, section 752.401(a)(4): 

Coverage. Waived to the extent 

necessary to provide that adverse action 

provisions do not apply to: (1) 

Conversions from GS special rates or 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3773 

NSPS Targeted Local Market 

Supplements to demonstration project 

pay, as long as total pay is not reduced; 

(2) reductions in pay due to the removal 

of a supervisory or team leader pay 

adjustment upon voluntary movement 

to a non-supervisory or non-team leader 

position; or (3) decreases in the amount 

of a supervisory or team leader pay 

adjustment based on the annual review. 

APPENDIX A—ARDEC EMPLOYEES BY DUTY LOCATION

[Totals exclude SES, ST, DCIPS and FWS employees] 

Duty location Employees Servicing Personnel Office 

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ ............................................................................................................ 2,956 NE Region. 

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD ............................................................................................. 23 NE Region. 

Rock Island, IL ....................................................................................................................... 155 NC Region. 

Adelphi, MD ........................................................................................................................... 31 NE Region. 

Watervliet, NY ........................................................................................................................ 239 NE Region. 

Washington, DC ..................................................................................................................... 5 NE Region. 

Ft. Benning, GA ..................................................................................................................... 1 NE Region. 

Ft. Knox, KY .......................................................................................................................... 1 NE Region. 

Ft. Lee, VA ............................................................................................................................. 1 NE Region. 

Ft. Leonardwood, MO ............................................................................................................ 1 NE Region. 

Ft. Shafter, HI ........................................................................................................................ 1 NE Region. 

Ft. Sill, OK ............................................................................................................................. 2 NE Region. 

Indianhead, MD ..................................................................................................................... 1 NE Region. 

MacDill AFB, FL ..................................................................................................................... 1 NE Region. 

Redstone Arsenal, AL ............................................................................................................ 3 SC Region. 

Total All Employees ........................................................................................................ 3,421 

Appendix B: Occupational Series by 

Occupational Family 

I. Engineering & Science 

0601 General Health Science Series 

0801 General Engineering Series 

0803 Safety Engineering Series 

0806 Materials Engineering Series 

0819 Environmental Engineering 

Series 

0830 Mechanical Engineering Series 

0840 Nuclear Engineering Series 

0850 Electrical Engineering Series 

0854 Computer Engineering Series 

0855 Electronics Engineering Series 

0858 Bioengineering and Biomedical 

Engineering Series 

0861 Aerospace Engineering Series 

0893 Chemical Engineering Series 

0896 Industrial Engineering Series 

0899 Engineering and Architecture 

Trainee Series 

1301 General Physical Science Series 

1306 Health Physics Series 

1310 Physics Series 

1320 Chemistry Series 

1321 Metallurgy Series 

1399 Physical Science Student Trainee 

Series 

1501 General Mathematics and 

Statistics Series 

1515 Operations Research Series 

1520 Mathematics Series 

1550 Computer Science Series 

1599 Mathematics and Statistics 

Student Trainee Series 

II. Business/Technical 

0018 Safety and Occupational Health 

Management Series 

0301 Miscellaneous Administration 

and Program Series 

0340 Program Management Series 

0341 Administrative Officer Series 

0342 Support Services Administration 

Series 

0343 Management and Program 

Analysis Series 

0346 Logistics Management Series 

0501 Financial Administration and 

Program Series 

0510 Accounting Series 

0802 Engineering Technical Series 

0856 Electronics Technical Series 

0895 Industrial Engineering Technical 

Series 

0905 General Attorney Series 

0950 Paralegal Specialist Series 

1001 Information and Arts Group 

Series General Arts and Information 

Series 

1035 Public Affairs Series 

1071 Audiovisual Production Series 

1083 Technical Writing and Editing 

Series 

1084 Visual Information Series 

1101 Business and Industry Series 

1102 Contracting Series 

1222 Patent Attorney Series 

1311 Physical Science Technician 

Series 

1410 Librarian Series 

1412 Technical Information Services 

Series 

1670 Equipment Services Series 

1702 Education and Training 

Technician Series 

1712 Training Instruction Series 

1801 General Inspection, Investigation, 

Enforcement, and Compliance 

Series 

1910 Quality Assurance Series 

2032 Packaging Series 

2210 Information Technology 

Management Series 

III. General Support 

0303 Miscellaneous Clerk and 

Assistant Series 

0318 Secretary Series 

0326 Office Automation Clerical and 

Assistance Series 

0335 Computer Clerk and Assistant 

Series 

0344 Management and Program 

Clerical and Assistance Series 

Appendix C: Contribution Factors and 

Level Descriptors 

1. Occupational Family DB— 

Engineering and Science (E&S) 

Factor 1–1: Problem Solving 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures personal and 

organizational problem-solving results. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Completed work 

meets projects/programs objectives. 

Recommendations are sound. 

Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3774 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Performs activities on a task; assists supervisor or other appropriate personnel ............... —Scope/Impact. 

• Resolves routine problems within established guidelines ................................................... —Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently performs assigned tasks within area of responsibility; refers situations to 

supervisor or other appropriate personnel when existing guidelines do not apply.

—Independence. 

• Takes initiative in determining and implementing appropriate procedures ......................... —Creativity. 

LEVEL II: 

• Plans and conducts functional technical activities for projects/programs ........................... —Scope/Impact. 

• Identifies, analyzes, and resolves moderately complex/difficult problems .......................... —Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently identifies and resolves conventional problems which may require deviations from accepted policies or instructions.—Independence. 

• Adapts existing plans and techniques to accomplish moderately complex projects/programs. Recommends improvements to the design or operation of systems, equipment, 

or processes.

—Creativity. 

LEVEL III: 

• Independently defines, directs, or leads highly challenging projects/programs. Identifies 

and resolves highly complex problems not susceptible to treatment by accepted methods.

—Scope/Impact. 

• Develops, integrates, and implements solutions to diverse, highly complex problems 

across multiple areas and disciplines.

—Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Anticipates problems, develops sound solutions and action plans to ensure program/mission accomplishment.—Independence. 

• Develops plans and techniques to fit new situations to improve overall program and policies. Establishes precedents in application of problem-solving techniques to enhance existing processes.—Creativity. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Plans and performs work across a broad range of highly complex activities that require 

substantial depth of analysis and expertise and/or organizational problem solving skills. 

The work significantly affects policies/major programs. Actively engages in organizational 

planning.

—Scope/Impact. 

• Resolves critical, multifaceted problems and/or develops new theories or methods that 

affect the work of other experts, major aspects of management programs, or a large 

number of people.

—Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently plans and carries out work from general objectives. Work results are considered authoritative. Expertise is recognized both internally and externally.—Independence. 

• Uses judgment and ingenuity in making decisions or developing methodologies for areas 

with substantial uncertainty. Adapts to tasks with changing/competing requirements. Approaches to solving problems require interpretation, deviation from traditional methods, 

or research of trends and patterns to develop new methods, scientific knowledge, or organizational principles.

—Creativity. 

LEVEL V: 

• Defines, establishes, and directs organizational focus (on challenging and highly complex project/programs). Identifies and resolves highly complex problems that cross organizational boundaries and promulgates solutions. Resolution of problems requires mastery of the field to develop new hypotheses or fundamental new concepts.— Scope/Impact. 

• Assesses and provides strategic direction for resolution of mission critical problems, policies, and procedures.—Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Works at senior level to define, integrate, and implement strategic direction for vital programs with long-term impact on large numbers of people. Initiates actions to resolve 

major organizational issues. Promulgates innovative solutions and methodologies.

—Independence. 

• Works strategically with senior management to establish new fundamental concepts and 

criteria and stimulate the development of new policies, methodologies, and techniques. 

Converts strategic goals into programs or policies.

—Creativity. 

LEVEL VI: 

• TBD.

Factor 1–2: Teamwork/Cooperation 

Factor Description: This factor, 

applicable to all teams, describes/ 

captures individual and organizational 

teamwork and cooperation. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Personal and 

organizational interactions exhibit and 

foster cooperation and teamwork. 

Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Works with others to accomplish routine tasks ................................................................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Contributes ideas in own area of expertise. Interacts cooperatively with others ................ —Contribution to Team. 

• Regularly completes assignments in support of team goals ............................................... —Effectiveness. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3775 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL II: 

• Works with others to accomplish projects/programs ........................................................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Uses varied approaches to resolve or collaborate on projects/programs issues. Facilitates cooperative interactions with others.—Contribution to Team. 

• Guides/supports others in executing team assignments. Proactively functions as an integral part of the team.—Effectiveness. 

LEVEL III: 

• Works with/leads others to accomplish complex projects/programs ................................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Applies innovative approaches to resolve unusual/difficult issues significantly impacting 

important policies or programs. Promotes and maintains environment for cooperation 

and teamwork.

—Contribution to Team. 

• Leads, guides and mentors others in formulating and executing team plans. Expertise is 

sought by peers.

—Effectiveness. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Leads team(s) working on critical aspects of technology areas or programmatic/business 

management efforts. Team results significantly affect internal/external organizations and/ 

or relationships.

—Scope of Team Effort. 

• Is accountable for quality and effectiveness of team efforts. Integrates efforts across disciplines.—Contribution to Team. 

• Leads/guides/mentors team(s) on highly complex, high priority programs. Is sought out 

for leadership roles and for consultation on complex issues with internal/external impact.

—Effectiveness. 

LEVEL V: 

• Leads/guides/mentors workforce in dealing with complex problems .................................. —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Solves broad organizational issues. Implements strategic plans within and across organizational components. Ensures a cooperative teamwork environment. Develops future 

team leaders and supervisors.

—Contribution to Team. 

• Leads/guides workforce in achieving organizational goals. Is sought out for leadership 

roles for critical issues and strategy. Fosters teamwork throughout the organization.

— Effectiveness. 

LEVEL VI: 

• TBD.

Factor 1–3: Customer Relations 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures the effectiveness of 

personal and organizational interactions 

with customers (anyone to whom 

services or products are provided), both 

internal (within an assigned 

organization) and external (outside an 

assigned organization). 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Personal and 

organizational interactions enhance 

customer relations and actively promote 

rapport with customers. Flexibility, 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Independently carries out routine customer requests ................................................ —Breadth of Influence. 

• Participates as a team member to meet customer needs ......................................... —Customer Needs. 

• Interacts with customers on routine issues with appropriate guidance ..................... —Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL II: 

• Guides the technical/functional efforts of individuals or team members as they 

interact with customers.

—Breadth of Influence. 

• Initiates meetings and interactions with customers to understand customer needs/ 

expectations.

—Customer Needs. 

• Interacts independently with customers to communicate information and coordinate actions.—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL III: 

• Guides and integrates functional efforts of individuals or teams in support of customer interaction. Seeks innovative approaches to satisfy customers.—Breadth of Influence. 

• Establishes customer alliances, anticipates and fulfills customer needs, and translates customer needs to programs/projects.—Customer Needs. 

• Interacts independently and proactively with customers to identify and define complex/difficult problems and to develop and implement strategies or techniques for 

resolving program/project problems (e.g., determining priorities and resolving conflict among customers’ requirements).

—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Leads efforts involving extensive customer interactions and partnerships. Establishes successful working relationships with customers to address and resolve 

highly complex or controversial issues.

—Breadth of Influence. 

• Identifies and fosters new customer alliances. Anticipates customer needs to avoid 

potential problems and improve customer satisfaction.

—Customer Needs. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3776 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

• Works proactively at senior level to assure customer satisfaction on programs and 

issues with a high level of customer interest and concern.

—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL V: 

• Leads and manages the organizational interactions with customers from a strategic standpoint.—Breadth of Influence. 

• Works to assess and promulgate political, fiscal, and other factors affecting customer and program/project needs. Works with customer at management levels to 

resolve problems affecting programs/projects (e.g., problems that involve determining priorities and resolving conflicts among customers’ requirements).

—Customer Needs. 

• Collaborates at senior level to stimulate customer alliances for program/project 

support. Stimulates, organizes, and leads overall customer interactions.

—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL VI: 

• TBD.

Factor 1–4: Leadership/Supervision 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures individual and 

organizational leadership and/or 

supervision. Recruits, develops, 

motivates, and retains quality team 

members in accordance with EEO/AA 

and Merit Principles. Takes timely/ 

appropriate personnel actions, 

communicates mission and 

organizational goals; by example, 

creates a positive, safe, and challenging 

work environment; distributes work and 

empowers team members. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Leadership and/or 

supervision effectively promotes 

commitment to mission 

accomplishment. Flexibility, 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Takes initiative in accomplishing assigned tasks ....................................................... —Leadership Role. 

• Provides inputs to others in own technical/functional area ........................................ —Breadth of Influence. 

• Seeks and takes advantage of developmental opportunities .................................... —Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL II: 

• Actively contributes as a team member/leader; provides insight and recommends 

changes or solutions to problems.

—Leadership Role. 

• Proactively guides, coordinates, and consults with others to accomplish projects ... —Breadth of Influence. 

• Identifies and pursues individual/team development opportunities ........................... —Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL III: 

• Provides guidance to individuals/teams; resolves conflicts. Considered a functional/technical expert by others in the organization; is regularly sought out by others for advice and assistance.—Leadership Role. 

• Fosters individual/team development by mentoring ................................................... —Breadth of Influence. 

• Pursues or creates training development programs for self and others ................... —Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL IV: 

• As a program area expert, resolves highly complex team problems and conflicts. 

Effectively seeks out and capitalizes on opportunities for teams/work units to 

achieve significant results that support organizational goals. Is sought out for consultation and leadership roles.

—Leadership Role. 

• Leads teams engaged in highly complex and critical work, with accountability for 

employee motivation, quality, and effectiveness and for team success.

—Breadth of Influence. 

• Fosters and initiates effective team development to meet current and future organizational needs. Actively seeks out opportunities for and engages in mentoring, 

coaching, and instruction. Pursues personal professional development.

—Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL V: 

• Establishes and/or leads teams to carry out complex projects or programs. Creates an organizational climate where empowerment and creativity thrive. Mentors 

and motivates workforce.

—Leadership Role. 

• Leads, defines, manages, and integrates efforts involving large numbers of people. Ensures organizational mission and program success.—Breadth of Influence. 

• Fosters workforce development. Encourages cross functional growth to meet mission needs. Pursues personal professional development as a model for staff.—Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL VI: 

• TBD.

Factor 1–5: Communication 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures the effectiveness of 

oral/written communications. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. 

Communications are clear, concise, 

and at appropriate level. Flexibility, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3777 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Communicates routine task status/results as required .............................................. —Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Provides timely data and written analyses for input to management/technical reports or contractual documents.—Written. 

• Explains status/results of assigned tasks .................................................................. —Oral. 

LEVEL II: 

• Communicates team or group tasking results, internally and externally, at peer levels.—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Writes, or is a major contributor to, management/technical reports or contractual 

documents.

—Written. 

• Presents informational briefings ................................................................................. —Oral. 

LEVEL III: 

• Communicates project or program results to all levels, internally and externally ..... —Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Reviews and approves, or is a major contributor to/lead author of, management 

reports or contractual documents for external distribution. Provides inputs to policies.

—Written. 

• Presents briefings to obtain consensus/approval ...................................................... —Oral. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Communicates complex technical, programmatic, and/or management information 

across multiple organizational levels to drive decisions by senior leaders internally 

and externally.

—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Leads efforts in documenting diverse and highly complex information, concepts, 

and ideas. Authors and enables authoritative reports pertaining to multiple areas 

of expertise, incorporating diverse viewpoints. Reviews communications of others 

for appropriate and accurate content.

—Written. 

• Demonstrates expert speaking skills and the adaptability to be effective in critical 

briefings.

—Oral. 

LEVEL V: 

• Determines and communicates organizational positions on major projects or policies to senior level.—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Prepares, reviews, and approves major reports or policies of organization for internal and external distribution. Resolves diverse viewpoints/controversial issues.—Written. 

• Presents organizational briefings to convey strategic vision or organizational policies.—Oral. 

LEVEL VI: 

• TBD.

Factor 1–6: Resource Management 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures personal and 

organizational utilization of resources to 

accomplish the mission. (Resources 

include, but are not limited to, personal 

time, equipment and facilities, human 

resources, and funds.) 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Resources are 

utilized effectively to accomplish 

mission. Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Uses assigned resources needed to accomplish tasks ............................................. —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Plans individual time and assigned resources to accomplish tasks .......................... —Planning/Budgeting. 

• Effectively accomplishes assigned tasks ................................................................... —Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL II: 

• Plans and utilizes appropriate resources to accomplish project goals ...................... —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Optimizes resources to accomplish projects/programs within established schedules.—Planning/Budgeting. 

• Effectively accomplishes projects/programs goals within established resource 

guidelines.

—Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL III: 

• Plans and allocates resources to accomplish multiple projects/programs ................ —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Identifies and optimizes resources to accomplish multiple projects/programs goals —Planning/Budgeting. 

• Effectively accomplishes multiple projects/programs goals within established 

guidelines.

—Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL IV: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3778 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

• Plans, allocates, and monitors resources in a complex environment with substantial instability in resources/requirements.—Scope of Responsibility. 

• Anticipates changes in workload and other resource requirements for multiple programs/projects and develops and advocates solutions in advance.—Planning/Budgeting. 

• Leads others in using resources more efficiently and implements innovative ideas 

to stretch limited resources.

—Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL V: 

• Develops, acquires, and allocates resources to accomplish mission goals and 

strategic objectives.

—Scope of Responsibility. 

• Formulates organizational strategies, tactics, and budget/action plan to acquire 

and allocate resources.

—Planning/Budgeting. 

• Optimizes, controls, and manages all resources across projects/programs. Develops and integrates innovative approaches to attain goals and minimize expenditures.—Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL VI: 

• TBD.

2. Occupational Family DE—Business 

and Technical (B&T) 

Factor 2–1: Problem Solving 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures personal and 

organizational problem-solving results. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Completed work 

meets projects/programs objectives. 

Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Performs activities on a task; assists supervisor or other appropriate personnel ..... —Scope/Impact. 

• Resolves routine problems within established guidelines .......................................... —Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently performs assigned tasks within area of responsibility; refers situations to supervisor or other appropriate personnel when existing guidelines do not 

apply.

—Independence. 

• Takes initiative in determining and implementing appropriate procedures ............... —Creativity. 

LEVEL II: 

• Plans and conducts functional technical activities for projects/programs .................. —Scope/Impact. 

• Identifies, analyzes, and resolves complex/difficult problems ................................... —Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently identifies and resolves conventional problems which may require 

deviations from accepted policies or instructions.

—Independence. 

• Adapts existing plans and techniques to accomplish complex projects/programs. 

Recommends improvements to the design or operation of systems, equipment, or 

processes.

—Creativity. 

LEVEL III: 

• Independently defines, directs, or leads highly challenging projects/programs. 

Identifies and resolves highly complex problems not susceptible to treatment by 

accepted methods.

—Scope/Impact. 

• Develops, integrates, and implements solutions to diverse, highly complex problems across multiple areas and disciplines.—Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Anticipates problems, develops sound solutions and action plans to ensure program/mission accomplishment.—Independence. 

• Develops plans and techniques to fit new situations to improve overall program 

and policies. Establishes precedents in application of problem-solving techniques 

to enhance existing processes.

—Creativity. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Plans and performs work across a broad range of highly complex activities that require substantial depth of analysis and expertise and/or organizational problem 

solving skills. The work significantly affects policies/major programs. Actively engages in organizational planning.

—Scope/Impact. 

• Resolves critical, multifaceted problems and/or develops new theories or methods 

that affect the work of other experts, major aspects of management programs, or 

a large number of people.

—Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently plans and carries out work from general objectives. Work results 

are considered authoritative. Expertise is recognized both internally and externally.

—Independence. 

• Uses judgment and ingenuity in making decisions or developing methodologies for 

areas with substantial uncertainty. Adapts to tasks with changing/competing requirements. Approaches to solving problems require interpretation, deviation from 

traditional methods, or research of trends and patterns to develop new methods, 

scientific knowledge, or organizational principles.

—Creativity. 

LEVEL V: 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3779 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

• Defines, establishes, and directs organizational focus (on challenging and highly 

complex project/programs). Identifies and resolves highly complex problems that 

cross organizational boundaries and promulgates solutions. Resolution of problems requires mastery of the field to develop new hypotheses or fundamental new 

concepts.

—Scope/Impact. 

• Assesses and provides strategic direction for resolution of mission critical problems, policies, and procedures.—Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Works at senior level to define, integrate, and implement strategic direction for 

vital programs with long-term impact on large numbers of people. Initiates actions 

to resolve major organizational issues. Promulgates innovative solutions and 

methodologies.

—Independence. 

• Works strategically with senior management to establish new fundamental concepts and criteria and stimulate the development of new policies, methodologies, 

and techniques. Converts strategic goals into programs or policies.

—Creativity. 

Factor 2–2: Teamwork/Cooperation 

Factor Description: This factor, 

applicable to all teams, describes/ 

captures individual and organizational 

teamwork and cooperation. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Personal and 

organizational interactions exhibit and 

foster cooperation and teamwork. 

Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Works with others to accomplish routine tasks .......................................................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Contributes ideas in own area of expertise. Interacts cooperatively with others ...... —Contribution to Team. 

• Regularly completes assignments in support of team goals ..................................... —Effectiveness. 

LEVEL II: 

• Works with others to accomplish projects/programs ................................................. —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Uses varied approaches to resolve or collaborate on projects/programs issues. 

Facilitates cooperative interactions with others.

—Contribution to Team. 

• Guides/supports others in executing team assignments. Proactively functions as 

an integral part of the team.

—Effectiveness. 

LEVEL III: 

• Works with/leads others to accomplish complex projects/programs ......................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Applies innovative approaches to resolve unusual/difficult issues significantly impacting important policies or programs. Promotes and maintains environment for 

cooperation and teamwork.

—Contribution to Team. 

• Leads guides and mentors others in formulating and executing team plans. Expertise is sought by peers.—Effectiveness. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Leads team(s) working on critical aspects of technology areas or programmatic/ 

business management efforts. Team results significantly affect internal/external organizations and/or relationships.

—Scope of Team Effort. 

• Is accountable for quality and effectiveness of team efforts. Integrates efforts 

across disciplines.

—Contribution to Team. 

• Leads/guides/mentors team(s) on highly complex, high priority programs. Is 

sought out for leadership roles and for consultation on complex issues with internal/external impact.

—Effectiveness. 

LEVEL V: 

• Leads/guides/mentors workforce in dealing with complex problems ......................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Solves broad organizational issues. Implements strategic plans within and across 

organizational components. Ensures a cooperative teamwork environment. Develops future team leaders and supervisors.

—Contribution to Team. 

• Leads/guides workforce in achieving organizational goals. Is sought out for leadership roles for critical issues and strategy. Fosters teamwork throughout the organization.—Effectiveness. 

Factor 2–3: Customer Relations 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures the effectiveness of 

personal and organizational interactions 

with customers (anyone to whom 

services or products are provided), both 

internal (within an assigned 

organization) and external (outside an 

assigned organization). 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Personal and 

organizational interactions enhance 

customer relations and actively promote 

rapport with customers. Flexibility, 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3780 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Independently carries out routine customer requests ................................................ —Breadth of Influence. 

• Participates as a team member to meet customer needs ......................................... —Customer Needs. 

• Interacts with customers on routine issues with appropriate guidance ..................... —Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL II: 

• Guides the technical/functional efforts of individuals or team members as they 

interact with customers.

—Breadth of Influence. 

• Initiates meetings and interactions with customers to understand customer needs/ 

expectations.

—Customer Needs. 

• Interacts independently with customers to communicate information and coordinate actions.—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL III: 

• Guides and integrates functional efforts of individuals or teams in support of customer interaction. Seeks innovative approaches to satisfy customers.—Breadth of Influence. 

• Establishes customer alliances, anticipates and fulfills customer needs, and translates customer needs to programs/projects.—Customer Needs. 

• Interacts independently and proactively with customers to identify and define complex/difficult problems and to develop and implement strategies or techniques for 

resolving program/project problems (e.g., determining priorities and resolving conflict among customers’ requirements).

—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Leads efforts involving extensive customer interactions and partnerships. Establishes successful working relationships with customers to address and resolve 

highly complex or controversial issues.

—Breadth of Influence. 

• Identifies and fosters new customer alliances. Anticipates customer needs to avoid 

potential problems and improve customer satisfaction.

—Customer Needs. 

• Works proactively at senior level to assure customer satisfaction on programs and 

issues with a high level of customer interest and concern.

—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL V: 

• Leads and manages the organizational interactions with customers from a strategic standpoint.—Breadth of influence. 

• Works to assess and promulgate political, fiscal, and other factors affecting customer and program/project needs. Works with customer at management levels to 

resolve problems affecting programs/projects (e.g., problems that involve determining priorities and resolving conflicts among customers’ requirements).

—Customer Needs. 

• Collaborates at senior level to stimulate customer alliances for program/project 

support. Stimulates, organizes, and leads overall customer interactions.

—Customer Interaction Level. 

Factor 2–4: Leadership/Supervision 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures individual and 

organizational leadership and/or 

supervision. Recruits, develops, 

motivates, and retains quality team 

members in accordance with EEO/AA 

and Merit Principles. Takes timely/ 

appropriate personnel actions, 

communicates mission and 

organizational goals; by example, 

creates a positive, safe, and challenging 

work environment; distributes work and 

empowers team members. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): 

Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Leadership and/or 

supervision effectively promotes 

commitment to mission 

accomplishment. Flexibility, 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Takes initiative in accomplishing assigned tasks ....................................................... —Leadership Role. 

• Provides inputs to others in own technical/functional area ........................................ —Breadth of Influence. 

• Seeks and takes advantage of developmental opportunities .................................... —Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL II: 

• Actively contributes as a team member/leader; provides insight and recommends 

changes or solutions to problems.

—Leadership Role. 

• Proactively guides, coordinates, and consults with others to accomplish projects ... —Breadth of Influence. 

• Identifies and pursues individual/team development opportunities ........................... —Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL III: 

• Provides guidance to individuals/teams; resolves conflicts. Considered a functional/technical expert by others in the organization; is regularly sought out by others for advice and assistance.—Leadership Role. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3781 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

• Defines, organizes, and assigns activities to accomplish projects/programs goals. 

Guides, motivates, and oversees the activities of individuals and teams with focus 

on projects/programs issues.

—Breadth of Influence. 

• Fosters individual/team development by mentoring. Pursues or creates training development programs for self and others.—Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL IV: 

• As a program area expert, resolves highly complex team problems and conflicts. 

Effectively seeks out and capitalizes on opportunities for teams/work units to 

achieve significant results that support organizational goals. Is sought out for consultation and leadership roles.

—Leadership Role. 

• Leads teams engaged in highly complex and critical work, with accountability for 

employee motivation, quality, and effectiveness and for team success.

—Breadth of Influence. 

• Fosters and initiates effective team development to meet current and future organizational needs. Actively seeks out opportunities for and engages in mentoring, 

coaching, and instruction. Pursues personal professional development.

—Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL V: 

• Establishes and/or leads teams to carry out complex projects or programs. Creates an organizational climate where empowerment and creativity thrive. Mentors 

and motivates workforce.

—Leadership Role. 

• Leads, defines, manages, and integrates efforts of several involving large numbers of people. Ensures organizational mission and program success.—Breadth of Influence. 

• Fosters workforce development. Encourage cross-functional growth to meet organizational needs. Pursues personal professional development as a model for staff.—Mentoring/Employee Development. 

Factor 2–5: Communication 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures the effectiveness of 

oral/written communications. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. 

Communications are clear, concise, 

and at appropriate level. Flexibility, 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Communicates routine task status/results as required .............................................. —Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Provides timely data and written analyses for input to management/technical reports or contractual documents.—Written. 

• Explains status/results of assigned tasks .................................................................. —Oral. 

LEVEL II: 

• Communicates team or group tasking results, internally and externally, at peer levels.—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Writes, or is a major contributor to, management/technical reports or contractual 

documents.

—Written. 

• Presents informational briefings ................................................................................. —Oral. 

LEVEL III: 

• Communicates project or program results to all levels, internally and externally ..... —Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Reviews and approves, or is a major contributor to/lead author of, management 

reports or contractual documents for external distribution. Provides inputs to policies.

—Written. 

• Presents briefings to obtain consensus/approval ...................................................... —Oral. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Communicates complex technical, programmatic, and/or management information 

across multiple organizational levels to drive decisions by senior leaders internally 

and externally.

—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Leads efforts in documenting diverse and highly complex information, concepts, 

and ideas in a highly responsive and effective manner. Authors and enables authoritative reports pertaining to multiple areas of expertise, incorporating diverse 

viewpoints, with minimal guidance from others. Reviews communications of others 

for appropriate and accurate content.

—Written. 

• Demonstrates expert speaking skills and the adaptability to be effective in critical 

briefings.

—Oral. 

LEVEL V: 

• Determines and communicates organizational positions on major projects or policies to senior level.—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Prepares, reviews, and approves major reports or policies of organization for internal and external distribution. Resolves diverse viewpoints/controversial issues.—Written. 

• Presents organizational briefings to convey strategic vision or organizational policies.—Oral. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3782 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

Factor 2–6: Resource Management 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures personal and 

organizational utilization of resources to 

accomplish the mission. (Resources 

include, but are not limited to, personal 

time, equipment and facilities, human 

resources, and funds.) 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Resources are 

utilized effectively to accomplish 

mission. Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Uses assigned resources needed to accomplish tasks ............................................. —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Plans individual time and assigned resources to accomplish tasks .......................... —Planning/Budgeting. 

• Effectively accomplishes assigned tasks ................................................................... —Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL II: 

• Plans and utilizes appropriate resources to accomplish project goals ...................... —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Optimizes resources to accomplish projects/programs within established schedules.—Planning/Budgeting. 

• Effectively accomplishes projects/programs goals within established resource 

guidelines.

—Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL III: 

• Plans and allocates resources to accomplish multiple projects/programs ................ —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Identifies and optimizes resources to accomplish multiple projects/programs goals —Planning/Budgeting. 

• Effectively accomplishes multiple projects/programs goals within established 

guidelines.

—Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL IV: 

• Plans, allocates, and monitors resources in a complex environment with substantial instability in resources/requirements.—Scope of Responsibility. 

• Anticipates changes in workload and other resource requirements for multiple programs/projects and develops and advocates solutions in advance.—Planning/Budgeting. 

• Leads others in using resources more efficiently and implements innovative ideas 

to stretch limited resources.

—Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL V: 

• Develops, acquires, and allocates resources to accomplish mission goals and 

strategic objectives.

—Scope of Responsibility. 

• Formulates organizational strategies, tactics, and budget/action plan to acquire 

and allocate resources.

—Planning/Budgeting. 

• Optimizes, controls, and manages all resources across projects/programs. Develops and integrates innovative approaches to attain goals and minimize expenditures.—Execution/Efficiency. 

3. Occupational Family DK—General 

Support 

Factor 3–1: Problem Solving 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures personal and 

organizational problem solving. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Completed work 

meets project/program objectives. 

Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Conducts activities on a segment of a task. Assists supervisor or other appropriate 

personnel.

—Scope/Impact. 

• Applies standard rules, procedures, or operations to resolve routine problems ....... —Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently carries out routine tasks. .................................................................... —Independence 

• Takes initiative in selecting and implementing appropriate procedures .................... —Creativity. 

LEVEL II: 

• Plans and conducts administrative activities for projects .......................................... —Scope/Impact. 

• Develops, modifies, and/or applies rules, procedures, or operations to resolve 

problems of moderate complexity/difficulty.

—Complexity/Difficulty. 

• Independently plans and executes assignments; resolves problems and handles 

deviations.

—Independence. 

• Identifies and adapts guidelines for new or unusual situations ................................. —Creativity. 

LEVEL III: 

• Plans and conducts complex administrative activities ............................................... —Scope/Impact. 

• Develops rules, procedures, or operations for complex/difficult organizational tasks —Complexity/Difficulty. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3783 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

• Identifies issues and determines approaches and methods to accomplish tasks. 

Initiates effective actions and resolves related conflicts.

—Independence. 

• Identifies issues requiring new procedures and develops appropriate guidelines .... —Creativity. 

Factor 3–2: Teamwork/Cooperation 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures individual and 

organizational teamwork and 

cooperation. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Personal and 

organizational interactions exhibit and 

foster cooperation and teamwork. 

Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Works with others to accomplish routine tasks .......................................................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Contributes ideas on routine procedures. Interacts cooperatively with others .......... —Contribution to Team. 

• Regularly completes tasks in support of team goals ................................................. —Effectiveness. 

LEVEL II: 

• Works with/leads to accomplish tasks ....................................................................... —Scope of Team Effort. 

• Resolves administrative problems; facilitates cooperative interactions with others .. —Contribution to Team. 

• Guides others and coordinates activities in support of team goals. Proactively 

functions as an integral part of the team.

—Effectiveness. 

LEVEL III: 

• Works with/leads others on complex issues/problems that may cross-functional 

areas.

—Scope of Team Effort. 

• Applies expertise in resolving complex administrative issues. Promotes and maintains environment for cooperation/teamwork. Sets tone for internal/external cooperation.—Contribution to Team. 

• Leads and guides others in formulating and executing plans in support of team 

goals.

—Effectiveness. 

Factor 3–3: Customer Relations 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures the effectiveness of 

personal and organizational interactions 

with customers (anyone to whom 

services or products are provided), both 

internal (within an assigned 

organization) and external (outside an 

assigned organization). 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Personal and 

organizational interactions enhance 

customer relations and actively promote 

rapport with customers. Flexibility, 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Assists customer support activities ............................................................................ —Breadth of Influence 

• Meets routine customer needs ................................................................................... —Customer Needs.

• Interacts with customers on routine issues within specific guidelines ....................... —Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL II: 

• Guides the administrative efforts of individuals or team members as they interact 

with customers.

—Breadth of Influence 

• Independently interacts with customers to understand customer needs/expectations.—Customer Needs. 

• Interacts independently with customers to communicate information and coordinate actions.—Customer Interaction Level. 

LEVEL III: 

• Identifies, defines, and guides administrative efforts in support of customer interactions; coordinates and focuses activities to support multiple customers.—Breadth of Influence. 

• Establishes customer alliances and translates needs to customer service .............. —Customer Needs. 

• Works independently with customers at all levels to define services and resolve 

non-routine problems.

—Customer Interaction Level. 

Factor 3–4: Leadership/Supervision 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures individual and 

organizational leadership and/or 

supervision. Recruits, develops, 

motivates, and retains quality team 

members in accordance with EEO/AA 

and Merit Principles. Takes timely/ 

appropriate personnel actions, 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3784 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

communicates mission and 

organizational goals; by example, 

creates a positive, safe, and challenging 

work environment; distributes work and 

empowers team members. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Leadership and/or 

supervision effectively promotes 

commitment to mission 

accomplishment. Flexibility, 

adaptability, and decisiveness are 

exercised appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Takes initiative in accomplishing assigned tasks. Asks for assistance as appropriate.—Leadership Role. 

• Provides input in administrative/functional area ......................................................... —Breadth of Influence.

• Seeks and takes advantage of developmental opportunities .................................... — Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL II: 

• Actively contributes as team member or leader; takes initiative to accomplish assigned projects.— Leadership Role. 

• Guides others in accomplishing projects ................................................................... —Breadth of Influence. 

• Identifies and pursues individual/team developmental opportunities ......................... —Mentoring/Employee Development. 

LEVEL III: 

• Provides guidance to individuals/teams; resolves conflicts. Expertise solicited by 

others.

— Leadership Role. 

• Guides and accounts for results or activities of individuals, teams, or projects ........ — Breadth of Influence. 

• Promotes individual/team development; leads development of training programs 

for self and others.

— Mentoring/Employee Development. 

Factor 3–5: Communication 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures the effectiveness of 

oral/written communications. 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Communications are 

clear, concise, and at appropriate level. 

Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Communicates routine task/status results as required .............................................. —Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Writes timely and accurate draft documentation ........................................................ —Written. 

• Explains status/results of assigned tasks. ................................................................. —Oral. 

LEVEL II: 

• Interprets and communicates administrative procedures within immediate organization.—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Prepares, coordinates, and consolidates documents, reports, or briefings ............... —Written. 

• Communicates/presents internal administrative/functional procedures and tasks internally and externally.—Oral. 

LEVEL III: 

• Develops and advises on administrative procedures and communicates them to all 

levels, both internally and externally.

—Level of Interaction (Audience). 

• Prepares, reviews, and/or approves documents, reports, or briefings ...................... —Written. 

• Explains and/or communicates complex/controversial administrative/functional procedures at all levels.—Oral. 

Factor 3–6: Resource Management 

Factor Description: This factor 

describes/captures personal and 

organizational utilization of resources to 

accomplish the mission. (Resources 

include, but are not limited to, personal 

time, equipment and facilities, human 

resources, and funds.) 

Expected Performance Criteria 

(Applicable to all contributions at all 

levels): Work is timely, efficient, 

appropriately coordinated and of 

acceptable quality. Available resources 

are utilized effectively to accomplish 

mission. Flexibility, adaptability, and 

decisiveness are exercised 

appropriately. 

Descriptors indicate the type of 

contribution appropriate for the high 

end of each level. Descriptors are not to 

be used individually to assess 

contributions, but rather are to be taken 

as a group to derive a single evaluation 

of the factor. 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

LEVEL I: 

• Uses assigned resources to accomplish tasks .......................................................... —Scope of Responsibility 

• Plans individual time and assigned resources to accomplish tasks .......................... —Planning/Budgeting. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3785 

Level descriptors Discriminators 

• Effectively accomplishes assigned tasks ................................................................... —Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL II: 

• Identifies and uses resources to accomplish projects ............................................... —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Plans resources to achieve project schedules ........................................................... —Planning/Budgeting. 

• Effectively accomplishes projects within established resource guidelines ................ —Execution/Efficiency. 

LEVEL III: 

• Plans, acquires, and allocates resources to accomplish objectives .......................... —Scope of Responsibility. 

• Coordinates resources across projects ...................................................................... —Planning/Budgeting.

• Optimizes resource utilization across projects ........................................................... —Execution/Efficiency.

Appendix D 

INTERVENTION MODEL

Intervention Expected effects Measures Data sources 

1. COMPENSATION: 

a. Pay banding ................................................. Increased organizational 

flexibility.

Perceived flexibility .............. Attitude survey. 

Reduced administrative 

workload, paperwork reduction.

Actual/perceived time savings.Personnel office data, PME 

results, attitude survey. 

Advanced in-hire rates ......... Starting salaries of banded 

v. non-banded employees.

Workforce data. 

Slower pay progression at 

entry levels.

Progression of new hires 

over time by band, career 

path.

Workforce data. 

Increased pay potential ........ Mean salaries by band, 

group, demographics.

Workforce data. 

Total payroll costs ................ Personnel office data. 

Increased satisfaction with 

advancement.

Employee perceptions of advancement.Attitude survey. 

Increased pay satisfaction ... Pay satisfaction, internal/external equity.Attitude survey. 

Improved recruitment ........... Offer/acceptance ratios; Percent declinations.Personnel office data. 

b. Conversion buy-in ........................................ Employee acceptance .......... Employee perceptions of equity, fairness.Attitude survey. 

Cost as a percent of payroll Workforce data. 

c. Pay differentials/adjustments ....................... Increased incentive to accept supervisory/team 

leader positions.

Perceived motivational 

power.

Attitude survey. 

2. PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT: 

a. Cash awards/bonuses .................................. Reward/motivate performance.Perceived motivational 

power.

Attitude survey. 

To support fair and appropriate distribution of 

awards.

Amount and number of 

awards by group, demographics.

Workforce data. 

Perceived fairness of awards Attitude survey. 

Satisfaction with monetary 

awards.

Attitude survey. 

b. Performance based pay progression ........... Increased pay-performance 

link.

Perceived pay-performance 

link.

Attitude survey. 

Perceived fairness of ratings Attitude survey. 

Improved performance feedback.Satisfaction with ratings ....... Attitude survey. 

Employee trust in supervisors.Attitude survey. 

Adequacy of performance 

feedback.

Attitude survey. 

Decreased turnover of high 

performers/Increased turnover of low performers.

Turnover by performance 

rating scores.

Workforce data. 

Differential pay progression 

of high/low performers.

Pay progression by performance scores, career path.Workforce data. 

Alignment of organizational 

and individual performance objectives and results.

Linkage of performance objectives to strategic plans/ 

goals.

Performance objectives, 

strategic plans. 

Increased employee involvement in performance planning and assessment.Perceived involvement .........

Performance management ..

Attitude survey/ 

focus groups. 

Personnel regulations. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
3786 Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 

INTERVENTION MODEL—Continued 

Intervention Expected effects Measures Data sources 

c. New appraisal process ................................. Reduced administrative burden.Employee and supervisor 

perceptions of revised procedures.

Attitude survey. 

Improved communication ..... Perceived fairness of process.Focus groups. 

d. Performance development ........................... Better communication of performance expectations.Feedback and coaching procedures used.Focus groups. 

Personnel office data. 

Time, funds spent on training by demographics.Training records. 

Improved satisfaction and 

quality of workforce.

Perceived workforce quality Attitude survey. 

3. ‘‘WHITE COLLAR’’ CLASSIFICATION: 

a. Improved classification systems with generic standards.Reduction in amount of time 

and paperwork spent on 

classification.

Time spent on classification 

procedures..

Personnel office data. 

Reduction of paperwork/ 

number of personnel actions (classification/promotion).

Personnel office data. 

Ease of use .......................... Managers’ perceptions of 

time savings, ease of use.

Attitude survey. 

b. Classification authority delegated to managers.Increased supervisory authority/accountability.Perceived authority .............. Attitude survey. 

Decreased conflict between 

management and personnel staff.

Number of classification disputes/appeals pre/post.Personnel records. 

Management satisfaction 

with service provided by 

personnel office.

Attitude survey. 

No negative impact on internal pay equity.Internal pay equity ............... Attitude survey. 

c. Dual career ladder ........................................ Increased flexibility to assign 

employees.

Assignment flexibility ............ Focus groups, surveys. 

Improved internal mobility .... Perceived internal mobility ... Attitude survey. 

Increased pay equity ............ Perceived pay equity ........... Attitude survey. 

Flatter organization .............. Supervisory/non-supervisory 

ratios.

Workforce data. 

Attitude survey. 

Improved quality of supervisory staff.Employee perceptions of 

quality or supervisory.

Attitude survey. 

4. MODIFIED RIF: ................................................... Minimize loss of high performing employees with 

needed skills.

Separated employees by demographics, performance 

scores.

Workforce data, attitude survey/focus group. 

Contain cost and disruption Satisfaction with RIF Process.Attitude survey/focus group. 

Cost comparison of traditional vs. Modified RIF.Personnel office/budget 

data. 

Time to conduct RIF-personnel office data.Personnel office data. 

Number of appeals/reinstatements.Personnel office data. 

5. HIRING AUTHORITY: 

a. Delegated Examining ................................... Improved ease and timeliness of hiring process.Perceived flexibility in authority to hire.Attitude survey. 

Improved recruitment of employees in shortage categories.Offer/accept ratios ................ Personnel office data. 

Percent declinations ............. Personnel office data. 

Timeliness of job offers ........ Personnel office data. 

GPAs of new hires, educational levels.Personnel office data. 

Reduced administrative 

workload/paperwork reduction.

Actual/perceived skills .......... Attitude survey. 

b. Term Appointment Authority ........................ Increased capability to expand and contract workforce.Number/percentage of conversions from modified 

term to permanent appointments.

Workforce data. 

Personnel office data. 

c. Flexible Probationary Period ........................ Expanded employee assessment.Average conversion period 

to permanent status.

Workforce data. 

Personnel office data. 

Number/percentage of employees completing probationary period.Workforce data. 

Personnel office data. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 13 / Thursday, January 20, 2011 / Notices 3787 

INTERVENTION MODEL—Continued 

Intervention Expected effects Measures Data sources 

Number of separations during probationary period.Workforce data. 

Personnel office data. 

6. EXPANDED DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES: 

a. Sabbaticals ................................................... Expanded range of professional growth and development.Number and type of opportunities taken.Workforce data. 

Application of enhanced 

knowledge and skills to 

work product.

Employee and supervisor 

perceptions.

Attitude survey. 

b. Critical Skills Training ................................... Improved organizational effectiveness.Number and type of training, 

Placement of employees, 

skills imbalances corrected.

Personnel office data. 

Employee and supervisor 

perceptions.

Personnel office data. 

Attitude survey. 

Application of knowledge 

gained from training.

Attitude survey/focus group. 

7. COMBINATION OF ALL INTERVENTIONS: 

All ...................................................................... Improved organizational effectiveness.Combination of personnel 

measures.

All data sources. 

Improved management of 

workforce.

Employee/Management job 

satisfaction (intrinsic/extrinsic).

Attitude survey. 

Improved planning ............... Planning procedures ............ Strategic planning documents. 

Perceived effectiveness of 

planning procedures.

Attitude survey. 

Improved cross functional 

coordination.

Actual/perceived coordination.Organizational charts. 

Increased product success .. Customer satisfaction .......... Customer satisfaction surveys. 

Cost of innovation ................ Project training/development 

costs (staff salaries, contract cost, training hours 

per employee).

Demo project office records. 

Contract documents. 

8. CONTEXT: 

Regionalization ................................................. Reduced servicing ratios/ 

costs.

HR servicing ratios ............... Personnel office data, workforce data. 

Average cost per employee 

served.

Personnel office data, workforce data. 

No negative impact on service quality.Service quality, timeliness .... Attitude survey/focus groups. 

[FR Doc. 2011–976 Filed 1–19–11; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 5001–06–P 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS